Controversial Topic: Which will cause more members to leave?

Which topic will cause more otherwise faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ to leave?



Ordain Women movement or the active fighting against legalization of Gay Marriage?

The "Gay Rights" movement has been and will continue to be more detrimental to the spread of the gospel and retention of members. The "Ordain Women" movement is microscopic in comparison, but both are rooted in the evil of philosophies of man mingled with scripture.

Of those two, I'd select the gay rights issue, although in my humble view those two issues pale into insignificance compared to other matters that cause spiritual apostasy and separation for present members of the church.

If it continues it's trajectory, the OW movement will lead to some excommunications and will die off, just like the "Heavenly Mother" movement of the early 90s was quieted when the movement leaders were ex'd or disfellowshipped. I see the OW as a re-emergence of that same misguided feminist movement, especially given OW's mission statement: "God is male and female, father and mother, and all of us can progress to be like them someday." Sounds like a rehash. You'll find if you look into the OW leaders personally, they are obsessed with the idea of bringing HM into worship alongside HF. Hannah Wheelwright even mentions carrying on the legacy of the "September Six." OW is a few loudmouthed individuals getting otherwise rational people worked up. Once the leaders are slapped down, the lay folk will go back to the norm.



The gay rights is a national trend that will not go away if a few figureheads are removed. It will be on of the means whereby the wheat and the chaff are separated.

I'm personally pushing for the "Ordain Women" movement to happen - and happen fast. I've already asked my Elders Quorum President if I can "tag team" my Home Teaching assignments with my wife. Every other month would be suhweeeeet. He's thinking about it. 8)

Ddawg wrote:
I'm personally pushing for the "Ordain Women" movement to happen - and happen fast. I've already asked my Elders Quorum President if I can "tag team" my Home Teaching assignments with my wife. Every other month would be suhweeeeet. He's thinking about it. 8)

:lol: And that is one of the very reasons why I don't think it will happen in this life. I am already intimidated by how much better my wife is than me. Give her the Priesthood and I don't have a chance.



I voted for the gay marriage issue to drive more away. It is becoming increasingly popular to be gay, so parents are going to have to confront the issue with their children that consider themselves gay. Some of them will remain faithful, but some will not. I think the large majority of LDS women do NOT want the Priesthood. I would say there are too many LDS folks that are accepting of the gay marriage movement. I think they mistakenly believe that it does not have any impact on their lives, so why worry about it. But it does have an impact...such as when you refuse to make a wedding cake for a gay marriage because you consider that against your religious beliefs. Or what if they want to force the Bishop to perform a free wedding that the Bishop performs for other members. There are real consequences for casting aside centuries of morality.

Hard to say.



If governments simply refused to sanction any marriage, the gay marriage deal would be over so there's an out. Homosexuality is only prevalent in 10-15% of the population.



The give women the priesthood movement is small but it isn't something that will ever just go away entirely. 51% of the world are women.



For now I'd say gay marriage has a greater number of adherents but that can easily change. I think the potential for loss among women is much greater.



It doesn't matter though. We'll have to address both.

Mars wrote:


When the Church cancels athletics at BYU.

This will drive me away that's for sure.

I agree with Schmoe's assessment 100%. The "Ordain Women" movement will be a niche kerfuffle. It will have a small, dedicated, and ardent group of supporters. The passionate zealots that embrace this cause will be comprised of mostly women and a few men supporters. I think their numbers will remain relatively small and unproductive. I agree with Sno's assessment. Once the key leadership group gets excommunicated, "OW" withers and fade away. IMHO.



The "Gay" issue is a different story. With the tide of public opinion turning and the full weight of both state and federal govt.'s supporting the gay movement - this issue is huge and will continue to grow. One reason being, the LBGT community is very aggressive thru litigation and legislation. A very organized and influential element of the LBGT community is essentially Fascist in their tactics and aggression. They will try to destroy your job and run you out of town if you disagree with them. If you doubt that, take a look at what happened to the ex-CEO of Mozilla, Brendan Eich (Because he made a political contribution 8 years ago - perfectly legal). They have the courts and politicians on their side, educational systems are onboard, the tsunami has arrived.



The reason this will continue to be a stumbling block within the Church is, almost everyone has a friend, or a family member who is LBGT. It's not uncommon. Mostly, these are kind and loving people. Note: They are our family and friends - we like them. Hence, it will be a growing challenge for Church members to reconcile the love they feel for their LBGT family and friends, and still remain stalwart re: the Church's policies about LBGT folks. It is challenging now, and is getting bigger. It will be a stumbling block for many folks.

I agree with you too Schmoe. If you believe in the Lord and His gospel you follow the prophets and the women who want the priesthood are not. The lgbt movement isn't either. I don't understand why these groups don't form their own church and do what they want. I don't know the laws but I don't think there's anything that stops them.



Maybe they suspect that they would have few followers and they want all of us to follow them because they can run the church better. Maybe some of them just want to take the churches (of course we aren't the only church being assaulted) down because they don't like them and/or don't believe in God.

nuk13 wrote:

I don't know the laws but I don't think there's anything that stops them.

If I understand your point here, it's not that there are any laws that stop the LBGT community from pursuing living together, pursuing any relationship they desire, pursuing any career, or being as successful as they are able - just like anyone else. They want marriage because of the rights contained within that legally binding status.



But, the current militancy of a certain element within the LBGT community goes beyond marriage. They want to force you and me to do business with them - when they want it. Forget the old "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." There have been well documented cases of bakeries and wedding photographers who are Christian and for personal reasons of conscience - did not want to bake a cake or photograph a gay wedding. Forget it. You will bake that cake and take those px's or you will be fined by the govt., put out of business by the govt, and possibly be jailed. It's no joke.



Marriage? Civil union vs. civil marriage vs church marriage vs domestic partnerships. There are similarities and there are differences. I don't have the time to get into the intricacies.



The big difference between Civil unions and Domestic partnerships vs. marriage is - the CU's and DP's are recognized within in the borders of the state where it was performed. Not all states have DP's and CU's - and they do not recognize them as legal re: property rights, visiting rights in hospitals, etc. Whereas, a marriage performed in 1 state is recognized in another state if that couple moves - for property rights, and visiting hospitals, etc. That's not comprehensive. Just a quick thumbnail.



Me personally, I am not neither for or against gay marriage at this point. I was very active in the Prop. 8 campaign here in CA. Both my Bishop and Stake President asked had me to get involved - and I was deeply involved - in promoting Prop. 8. I am disappointed in the post Prop. 8 ruling (that it was overturned with a court ruling). Basically now, I'm just tired. I've fought the good fight for many years - years. I'm just focusing on my family and taking care of my responsibilities at home.



I just know that the whole gay issue is huge, getting bigger, and it has passed the tipping point here in CA. It is over and done. Turn the lights out.



I think it will continue to be a large stumbling block for some Church members in the future. It will never be resolved (to the satisfaction of the LBGT crowd). It will cause some Church members to stumble.



Have a nice day.

Of course, had those couples just baked an awful tasting cake or took pictures in which all of the heads were cut off, the courts could not have done a thing about it.

The reason this will continue to be a stumbling block within the Church is, almost everyone has a friend, or a family member who is LBGT. It's not uncommon. Mostly, these are kind and loving people. Note: They are our family and friends - we like them. Hence, it will be a growing challenge for Church members to reconcile the love they feel for their LBGT family and friends, and still remain stalwart re: the Church's policies about LBGT folks. It is challenging now, and is getting bigger. It will be a stumbling block for many folks.

My friend is an adulterer, let's praise and promote him. (not really true but you get my point).

Gay marriage issue, and it's not even close. The amount of people that have left, in part, to that already will outnumber any that leave from ordain women. For most of the members of the church, the ordination of the priesthood is an asked and answered thing. The faithful know that it may be a change that comes in the future, but it's not anything to worry about now.



Gay marriage is a difficult issue for me, because I do believe that there are rights that every person should have. In this country, we tie a lot of these rights to marriages that are legally recognized.The cost to ensure these rights for those who cannot be legally married is much more than for those who pay the 50 bucks for a wedding license.



However, I feel that religions and people should have the right to be conscientious objectors. We allow people in the armed services to opt for honorable discharge instead of going to a war zone, and they knew what they signed up for with military service. We're seeing that with other things, like Obamacare, that regular citizens are not given the same courtesy.

I think "otherwise faithful" is a pretty far stretch of verbology. If you have a solid testimony of Christ and the restoration of the gospel, you aren't going to let either one of these two topics make you drop your covenants.



If you put in "gets offended by someone" or "Burns out from overextending his/herself" as options, those would win in a landslide.

Well, looks like we find out soon--the Ordain Women founder and one of the most-vocal pro-gay Mormons are both headed to church disciplinary councils. It's interesting that, when they got their notices, each ran to the same place first---the New York Times, but they're not trying to exert social nor political pressure, just trying to make sure ol' President Monson hears their pleas. :roll:



I also enjoyed how they try to make hay/conspiracy out of (1) the notices of the councils being issued on consecutive days, and (2) how Mrs. Kelly's council is being held in Virginia instead of Utah following her recent move to Utah. The NYT fails to mention that Mrs. Kelly had notice of the possibility of the council and was placed on informal probation in early May--well before her move, and if a bishop feels a move is predicated to avoid discipline, he retains the right to hold the member's records and convene a council in the old ward--the ward most familiar with the alleged apostasy to avoid someone bouncing around the country to avoid a council. So not only was the timing not as coincidental as OW would make you think, but the only one trying to game the council system here is the member.

snoscythe wrote:
Well, looks like we find out soon--the Ordain Women founder and one of the most-vocal pro-gay Mormons are both headed to church disciplinary councils.

Ooops! If you're gonna play - there's a time to pay. The grist wheel of justice turns slowly, but it grinds away.

snoscythe wrote:

It's interesting that, when they got their notices, each ran to the same place first---the New York Times ......

Using the New York Slimes as your "bully pulpit" speaks volumes about these folks. Nuff said.

snoscythe wrote:
Well, looks like we find out soon--the Ordain Women founder and one of the most-vocal pro-gay Mormons are both headed to church disciplinary councils. It's interesting that, when they got their notices, each ran to the same place first---the New York Times, but they're not trying to exert social nor political pressure, just trying to make sure ol' President Monson hears their pleas. :roll:



I also enjoyed how they try to make hay/conspiracy out of (1) the notices of the councils being issued on consecutive days, and (2) how Mrs. Kelly's council is being held in Virginia instead of Utah following her recent move to Utah. The NYT fails to mention that Mrs. Kelly had notice of the possibility of the council and was placed on informal probation in early May--well before her move, and if a bishop feels a move is predicated to avoid discipline, he retains the right to hold the member's records and convene a council in the old ward--the ward most familiar with the alleged apostasy to avoid someone bouncing around the country to avoid a council. So not only was the timing not as coincidental as OW would make you think, but the only one trying to game the council system here is the member.

I hope those dear members realize that no position or ideology or stand is worth more than membership in the Kingdom of God.

Sad day for them, hopefully they can overcome their pride and admit the error of their ways.