Another LDS clusterf-ck

[afleitch]

http://kutv.com/news/local/family-wonders-what-is-next-for-faithful-same-sex-marriage

One 7-year-old girl, is one month away from baptism in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and her father is in a same-sex marriage, what happens now?

That's the question one gay couple is asking after the LDS church came out with a policy regarding the children of same-sex parents.

According to the policy the children with "a parent living in a same-gender relationship," can't be blessed, baptized, confirmed, ordained or recommended for a mission until they are 18-years-old.

"It's not fair to ask anybody to choose sides," said Randon Spackman, 36. Randon is married to his partner Ben Christensen, 36, and has a daughter who is turning 8-years-old next month. Spackman says she's very active in the LDS church and is excited about her baptism.

"She's been expecting to be baptized for the longest time and then all of a sudden, just a month before policy changes, and she may not be eligible anymore," said Spackman. "They are treating her differently, not because of anything she's done but because of what I've done."

[afleitch]

OK but why is she a Mormon in the first place? She's only 7 so she clearly didn't convert on her own...meaning her gay parents must've raised her that way--why would any gay couple raise their kid as a Mormon?!

Quite frankly, why would any gay couple raise their child to be Christian. BUT. That's not the issue here. This is not a matter of yours or my personal preference here. People do raise their children in a religion that hurts them as individuals because sometimes people can rise above whatever is thrown their way, and yet in some cases the obsession religious bodies have over what their parents are is so venomous they even wish to poison their children by association.

[afleitch]

Why would the leaker have to be a non-believer?

Because the handbook is kept pretty quiet, non-bishops are not supposed to see it at all. It's not specifically touchy to talk about like temple ordinances, but it's not supposed to be seen by just any member of the church. It's for bishops to consult when they make a major decision, or do a bishop's interview (basically talk to members about how their life is going and making sure they're living according to church doctrine), or etc. Not sure how else to explain it.

But in any case, a believing bishop would know not to leak it, and you'd have to be pretty bad at technology to "accidentally" leak it. Specifically, to "accidentally" leak it to John Dehlin, a former (excommunicated, actually) church member and prominent church critic who immediately then leaked it to the media. Dehlin kind of has a grudge against the church (he was excommunicated for publicly trying to advocate positions and views of history contrary to the church's view, such as a more negative view of Joseph Smith). So this leak was no accident, whoever did it knew what they were doing.

A believeing bishop might know not to leak it. But they still might because of the contents, I think as a matter of conscience.

[afleitch]

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3391057-155/lds-gay-policy-came-from-god

It 'came from God' after all.