I definitely see what you're saying, and that's a very good analogy. I guess the difference for me is that Wagner's music and anti-semitism were two mostly separate things -- his music wasn't being used to promote his prejudices. On the other hand, the LDS's SEO, by its very purpose, is promoting their ideology.
I just find this casual discussion about the self-promotion of a group which at its very core believes that friends of mine are inferior, sinful, damaged goods because of the way that they were born a bit upsetting. Even if SEO practise is a separate topic from their scripture, I think that this kind of discussion attributes to them an undeserved level of legitimacy.
> I guess the difference for me is that Wagner's music and anti-semitism were two mostly separate things -- his music wasn't being used to promote his prejudices.
Actually, Wagner's music was used to promote his prejudices, however Wagner himself didn't have much of a role in said promotion (as he was dead long before the 1930s).
Hey, grantheaslip, I know this is offtopic, but I'm LDS and just fwiw, we aren't "a group which at its very core believes that friends of mine are inferior, sinful, damaged goods because of the way that they were born." In fact, the LDS church doesn't think anybody is damaged goods, gay, straight or otherwise. I have a few really good friends who are gay and LDS and would take issue with that statement, too. That doesn't mean that we see things the same way you do, but we wouldn't call anybody damaged goods. People are just too good and precious to be thought of that way.
To be fair, they just recently slightly improved their stance on homosexuality, but saying "the LDS church doesn't think anybody is damaged goods" is whitewashing at best. Here's the new, improved policy:
In short, gay people are sinners, are "subject to church discipline", but can be forgiven if they repent for their sins (i.e. stop being gay -- i.e. stop being themselves). Church leaders should tell them to "control unrighteous thoughts". And they aren't allowed to attend Church. The only substantive positive change is that church leaders are no longer told to send gay members to counselling, which they were up until a month ago. How is telling someone "you can't be a real Mormon or go to heaven unless you stop being gay" not telling them they're damaged goods?
I don't want to say you're lying about your gay Mormon friends, but presumably they can't actually go to church, and through some kind of Stockholm syndrome consider themselves a member of an organisation that thinks that "Homosexual behaviour can be forgiven through sincere repentance".
Sure, you can talk about how you think everyone is good and precious and deserves love, but beyond platitudes, the Church's policies on homosexuality are pretty clear.
2 quick responses and then I'll bow out. First, nobody is told they're not allowed to attend church. In fact, people who are excommunicated from the Mormon church are in fact _encouraged_ to keep attending so that they can come back into what's called "full fellowship" of the church by changing their lives to meet the standards of the church.
Secondly, there is a distinction between being gay and having sex. Mormons, gay or straight, can't have sex outside of marriage. If a gay person has outside of marriage they are subject to the same discipline that a straight person who has sex outside of marriage would have. Some of my gay, believing Mormon friends are simply chaste. Some of my gay, believeing Mormon friends are in heterosexual marriages. They do this with the full knowledge of their spouses, and with no hope of becoming straight, just because they feel like it's the right thing for them.
Nobody is telling anybody they can't go to heaven or be a real Mormon unless they stop being gay. They're saying, "be chaste." I know that's a distinction that will probably be lost, but it's a real distinction, and a real requirement that all Mormons try to live up to when they're not married.
All that notwithstanding, I assure you I'm not lying about my gay Mormon friends, if you're ever in the Salt Lake area look me up, I'm sure they'd love to meet you :) One of them is always looking for good hackers for various projects.
> First, nobody is told they're not allowed to attend church. In fact, people who are excommunicated from the Mormon church are in fact _encouraged_ to keep attending so that they can come back into what's called "full fellowship" of the church by changing their lives to meet the standards of the church.
You're probably right here. I've heard contrary, but I haven't done my research on that, and I know there's a tonne of misinformation on both sides.
> Secondly, there is a distinction between being gay and having sex. Mormons, gay or straight, can't have sex outside of marriage. If a gay person has outside of marriage they are subject to the same discipline that a straight person who has sex outside of marriage would have. Some of my gay, believing Mormon friends are simply chaste. Some of my gay, believing Mormon friends are in heterosexual marriages. They do this with the full knowledge of their spouses, and with no hope of becoming straight, just because they feel like it's the right thing for them.
By "just because they feel like it's the right thing for them", I'm assuming what you mean here is "because they have no other option". I can't imagine an openly gay person choosing to be in a heterosexual marriage because it "feels right". What you just said might sound perfectly natural in Salt Lake City, but it would be an utterly ridiculous, and possibly offensive idea in, say, Toronto.
> Nobody is telling anybody they can't go to heaven or be a real Mormon unless they stop being gay. They're saying, "be chaste." I know that's a distinction that will probably be lost, but it's a real distinction, and a real requirement that all Mormons try to live up to when they're not married.
But if you say "you can't get married to someone who's the opposite sex" and "you can't have sex unless you're married", what you're really saying is that gay people are never allowed to have sex with the gender they were born attracted to. I consider that cruel and inhumane. And I'm not buying the "gay people can go to heaven thing". The church's stated policy is that "Homosexual behaviour violates the commandments of God". That's a pretty clear indictment.
> All that notwithstanding, I assure you I'm not lying about my gay Mormon friends, if you're ever in the Salt Lake area look me up, I'm sure they'd love to meet you :) One of them is always looking for good hackers for various projects.
If I'm ever in SLS, I might, I really do want to understand the thought processes here, but I can't say that it's at the top of my list of travel destinations, with all due respect :).
I'm not an LDS by any possible stretch of the imagination, but I must say, SLS is actually a really nice town in a fantastically cool and wonderfully bizarre geographical setting. Flying into the city and over the salt marshes, is like flying into another planet. If you can get over the heebeejeebies of flying into LDS central it's really worth the trip. Kinda like visiting the Vatican in Rome in a certain sense.
I just find this casual discussion about the self-promotion of a group which at its very core believes that friends of mine are inferior, sinful, damaged goods because of the way that they were born a bit upsetting. Even if SEO practise is a separate topic from their scripture, I think that this kind of discussion attributes to them an undeserved level of legitimacy.