LDS Church pleased with BSA compromise on gay scouts

[katmr]

This was the headline of our local news.....here is the story.


SALT LAKE CITY — The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a statement Thursday saying it is satisfied with the Boy Scouts of America's proposed policy compromise on gay Scouts. That proposal would allow gay Scouts — but not gay Scout leaders — to participate fully in Scouting programs.



"While the church has not launched any campaign either to effect or prevent a policy change we have followed the discussion," the statement noted, adding that LDS officials "are satisfied that BSA has made a thoughtful, good-faith effort to address issues that, as they have said, remain 'among the most complex and challenging issues facing the BSA and society today."



"The current BSA proposal constructively addresses a number of important issues that have been part of the on-going dialogue including consistent standards for all BSA partners, recognition that Scouting exists to serve and benefit youth rather than Scout leaders, a single standard of moral purity for youth in the program, and a renewed emphasis for Scouts to honor their duty to God."

“(We) are satisfied that BSA has made a thoughtful, good-faith effort to address issues that, as they have said, remain 'among the most complex and challenging issues facing the BSA and society today.'”
–LDS Church statement



The statement concluded with an expression of gratitude to BSA "for their careful consideration of these issues. We appreciate the positive things contained in this current proposal that will help build and strengthen the moral character and leadership skills of youth as we work together in the future.'"



The LDS Church is the largest sponsor of Scouting, with more than 430,000 Scouts currently registered in various Scouting programs. According BSA statistics, 38 percent of all BSA Scouting units are affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.



The statement comes in the wake of three months of speculation and controversy based on the BSA's late January announcement that it was considering eliminating the organization's membership policy prohibiting participation by gay Scouts or Scout leaders. The BSA National Executive Board decided not to decide on the proposal during its early February meetings. Instead, the board said it would hear input on the proposal from chartered Scout organizations and sponsors before a proposal was submitted to the meeting of the BSA National Council in May.



Earlier this month the BSA began to circulate the language of a proposed resolution that many feel is a compromise between those who want to completely eliminate current policy restrictions and those who want to maintain the existing policy. According to the BSA website, the resolution would "remove the restriction denying membership to youth on the basis of sexual orientation alone and would maintain the current membership policy for all adult leaders of the Boy Scouts of America."



National Scout officials said the resolution reinforces "that Scouting is a youth program and any sexual conduct, whether heterosexual or homosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting."



The resolution will be voted upon during the BSA National Council meeting in Grapevine, Texas, May 22-24.

[AlbertaBronco]

I will have nothing to do with scouts ... ever! They do not believe the same way I do ... esp here in Canada! The fact that the Boy Scoutts of Canada purposely hid all the sexual abuse allegations that happened in the 80's. The program here in Canada has lost all of its integrity and it can never get it back! see this article: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... -list.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[katmr]

This is the part that really perplexes me.

The statement concluded with an expression of gratitude to BSA "for their careful consideration of these issues. We appreciate the positive things contained in this current proposal that will help build and strengthen the moral character and leadership skills of youth as we work together in the future.'"

Why has the church not drawn a more definite line on morality and said if the Boy Scout Program accepts the current proposal to allow gay scouts into the program, the church will stand with God on his morals and no longer support the BSA?
I understand their is a difference between one who struggles with SSA and someone who is gay. To me someone who is gay has acted on SSA. Thoughts?

[Melissa]

This is the part that really perplexes me.

The statement concluded with an expression of gratitude to BSA "for their careful consideration of these issues. We appreciate the positive things contained in this current proposal that will help build and strengthen the moral character and leadership skills of youth as we work together in the future.'"

Why has the church not drawn a more definite line on morality and said if the Boy Scout Program accepts the current proposal to allow gay scouts into the program, the church will stand with God on his morals and no longer support the BSA?
I understand their is a difference between one who struggles with SSA and someone who is gay. To me someone who is gay has acted on SSA. Thoughts?

I tend to believe the same as you that there is a difference between ssa and gay, gay to me sounds like you have acted on it and have assumed that title by what you do.
With the new church websites about ssa and "gay brothers and sisters" i am not at all suprised that they have taken the same stance with the scout decision. We do live in a very confused world with kids being raised as whatever their parents allow them to be or push them to be (as far as gender identity). I do feel bad for the little ones(pre puberty) who would be punished before they really have even had the chance, they are just confused or controled or whatever the right wording is.

It is a tricky thing when you dive into the inner workings. It is wise and necessary to have a firm stance on morals and I believe that with careful implementation and direction this could be less severe than most would think. But then again I am an idealist who routinely gets proven wrong. We just live in a backwards world these days, i know the church will NOT change its morality standards! We will never condone gay behavior or accept it as anything less than against Gods laws.

[Craig]

I never thought during my lifetime I would read a news story titled; "Mormon Church to Boy Scouts: Gay Scouts OK" I'm very disappointed and confused regarding why the church is taking this position. I wonder if SLC considered potential consequences within the membership. I wholeheartedly believe there will be a reluctance by many members to continue supporting the Scouting program and any approval by the church is likely to result in widespread dissension. I served as a Scoutmaster paying my dues like so many young fathers if the calling was extended again I would respectfully decline. I suspect this will be a hot topic in High Priest group this week.

[Seek the Truth]

Isn't this about kids?

[seer stone]

I support the church's decision to allow gay boy scouts be apart of the program. I understand why people are concerned. My question is if a boy has acted on that impulse once or twice, does he need to be labeled gay the rest of his life? Especially if he decides to incorporate change in his life. I don't think BSA is planning on changing the scout motto. I believe what the church is trying to do, is trying to teach and instill values into these young men lives who might have taken a wrong path. BSA is trying to find a solution to a problem before it gets worse. I don't think any of us are in a position to judge one of these boys. I also completely support the BSA's decision to have no gay leaders. To allow gay leaders, would be openly accepting the sin in my opinion, because then BSA would be supporting a homosexual individual as a role model. That would not be advocating good leadership examples to our children.

[Craig]

Isn't this about kids?

It's a about the kids, how do you handle a situation when a member of the troop is openly gay and flaunts it. Anyone that believes it won't happen even within the confines of the church is respectfully daydreaming. Once Scouting places it's official approval for gays there will be little that can be done to restrict sharing the belief that homosexuality is normal. Any suggestion by Troop leaders or Scouts themselves that homosexuality is a deviant lifestyle will be viewed as a violation of the Scout charter. Bishop's will be powerless to enforce virtues that are central to the church. Many LDS sponsored troops attract members and leaders from outside the Ward, this is just opening the door for what I foresee as a total mess succumbing to political pressures and correctness and only a first step towards moving Scouting into a secular and liberally minded organization. The line must be drawn I would have preferred to see the church establish a program of their own as our Christian brothers have suggested from conservative evangelical denominations.

[gkearney]

Scout Australia has never had this policy. I have never heard of Duce a problem here with youth or adults. We have coed scouting and such is rare even between the boy and girls in the setting of scouts. Is the culture of the US that different from that of Australia? I don't think so. Scouts Australia has strict standards for conduct by everyone. We do not even let married couple stay in the same tent at scout outing. You just need to have the same rules for everyone gay or not. Most world scouting programs, even those in conservative islamic nations have never had this policy.

[SpeedRacer]

If a boy is flaunting gay or straight sexual relations, he should be censured by his troop for not living the oath and law. He should be considered for removal. Were the boy to come into the troop and begin to live by the oath, law, motto and slogan, the chance that that boy would continue with his SSA is significantly reduced.

[sevenator]

I think I understand what they are trying to do in light of the Church's recent statements on SSA and the stand taken on SSA vs. acting on it. The problem is, we're talking about a lot of boys who don't really understand their sexuality yet. Throw a kid that's gay (or even thinks he is or just tells people that he is for attention) into the troop and you could literally wreck several boys before they even know what's going on within themselves.

I think it's really not a great move, especially when you consider that boys need not be members to participate in a Church-sponsored troop and therefore are not necessarily subject to the morality requirements of holding the priesthood, etc. I suppose that could be dictated by the individual troop and/or the bishop of an individual unit. I'm not sure worthiness interviews with non-member kids would work out very well, though.

I'm going to have to see what happens on the local level.

What a mess....

[BroJones]

A friend of mine deals with North Sanpete High School in Utah, and said that a big trend there now is for students to say that they are "gay". There seems to be a lot of support (and attention) given to those students who make this announcement. Personally not sure this trend should be encouraged, in high school or in scouting.

[katmr]

I agree, I think the whole thing is a mess. I understand that we all have weaknesses. For some it is SSA and in the church we do not disclude from membership on SSA alone however, part of the problem for me is the way the statement is worded and seems to be promoting the idea that it's okay to be gay and giving the BSA our support. I really was disappointed and sickened by the statement I read if I'm reading it with the correct interpretation and context. At a time when immorality is being pushed at us to accept it as okay I'm disappointed that the church didn't take a more definitive stand on this issue because I feel like a line has been drawn and it gets pushed further and further. Would it not be a good thing for the church to correctly and sharply define exactly where it stands on this issue? Would it not be a good thing for the church to state that we will always stand strong in Gods principles of being a moral people which does not include homosexuality, although we sympathize with those suffering from SSA? Would it not be a good thing for the church to state that we strive to raise moral young men and we will not continue our support if the change allows for gay boys to participate? Would it not be a good thing to keep letting the world know that we will not be moved from Gods laws?
Instead I see a statement that references positive things in the proposal that will help build and strengthen moral character???? As we work together in the future???? To me this says, that no matter the decision made by the BSA the church plans to continue working with them. It will be interesting to see what happens with the vote the end of May.

[sadie_Mormon]

If a boy is flaunting gay or straight sexual relations, he should be censured by his troop for not living the oath and law.

"Straight..." there are no girls in the BSA so how does that work.

[Benjamin_LK]

If a boy is flaunting gay or straight sexual relations, he should be censured by his troop for not living the oath and law.

"Straight..." there are no girls in the BSA so how does that work.

There are girls and women who work as staff for the BSA at campgrounds. There are women who serve as scoutmasters and troop leaders. It is not a totally woman-free institution.

There are also disciplinary standards in the BSA, among of which, it is really wrong for me as a scout to have such relations with another scout or with a leader, and it is a pretty serious offense if a scoutmaster or leader regardless of gender commits sexual acts with a scout and/or another leader. All in all, the BSA does have disciplinary standards. Plus seriously, while I was in the BSA, I had no problem with going to scout camp for a week, then writing letters to my then-girlfriend, or calling and hanging out with her when I got back home.

[skmo]

I support the church's decision to allow gay boy scouts be apart of the program. I understand why people are concerned. My question is if a boy has acted on that impulse once or twice, does he need to be labeled gay the rest of his life?

This is not about a boy who does something foolish a few times because he was curious or succumbed to pressure, it's about boys who openly proclaim themselves to be gay, and that belief being supported as acceptable. I have no problem with this happening in public schools, because since we currently require kids to go to school by law, it would be wrong to deny a person's right to be who and what they are for themselves. However, in a private organization, the organization should have the right to set its own standards, and if people don't like the standards, don't join. Start your own organization.

To allow gay leaders, would be openly accepting the sin in my opinion, because then BSA would be supporting a homosexual individual as a role model.

By the BSA telling openly gay scouts it's okay for them to be in scouts, they're still sending the message that they are accepting the sin.

[Benjamin_LK]

I agree, I think the whole thing is a mess. I understand that we all have weaknesses. For some it is SSA and in the church we do not disclude from membership on SSA alone however, part of the problem for me is the way the statement is worded and seems to be promoting the idea that it's okay to be gay and giving the BSA our support. I really was disappointed and sickened by the statement I read if I'm reading it with the correct interpretation and context. At a time when immorality is being pushed at us to accept it as okay I'm disappointed that the church didn't take a more definitive stand on this issue because I feel like a line has been drawn and it gets pushed further and further. Would it not be a good thing for the church to correctly and sharply define exactly where it stands on this issue? Would it not be a good thing for the church to state that we will always stand strong in Gods principles of being a moral people which does not include homosexuality, although we sympathize with those suffering from SSA? Would it not be a good thing for the church to state that we strive to raise moral young men and we will not continue our support if the change allows for gay boys to participate? Would it not be a good thing to keep letting the world know that we will not be moved from Gods laws?
Instead I see a statement that references positive things in the proposal that will help build and strengthen moral character???? As we work together in the future???? To me this says, that no matter the decision made by the BSA the church plans to continue working with them. It will be interesting to see what happens with the vote the end of May.

One of the things I wonder is, can the church have its own standards apart from the rest of the BSA as a whole. What I also wonder if some people may realize this is even in scout troops sponsored by LDS Congregations, not neccessarily all of the leaders or scouts are members of the church. Among the big things the member leaders really chastised us as priesthood holders for was how good or how bad of an example we set for the nonmembers in the BSA. The BSA isn't the church, but it is an institution through which the Church membership regularly interacts with nonmembers in other troops, or even within troops associated with the Church, on a regular basis.

[gkearney]

If a boy is flaunting gay or straight sexual relations, he should be censured by his troop for not living the oath and law.

"Straight..." there are no girls in the BSA so how does that work.

While there are no girls in LDS sponsored troops that is not the case for the BSA as a whole. The Venturing program is coed for ages 14-20 and Sea Scouting, the second oldest and most obscure of the BSA youth programs has been coed from the time the US Coast Guard started enlisting women in the 1960s. The Coast Guard and the Sea Scouts have long been closely tied together.

The upcoming jamboree this summer will be the first with a significant number of girl in attendance.

[Benjamin_LK]

If a boy is flaunting gay or straight sexual relations, he should be censured by his troop for not living the oath and law.

"Straight..." there are no girls in the BSA so how does that work.

While there are no girls in LDS sponsored troops that is not the case for the BSA as a whole. The Venturing program is coed for ages 14-20 and Sea Scouting, the second oldest and most obscure of the BSA youth programs has been coed from the time the US Coast Guard started enlisting women in the 1960s. The Coast Guard and the Sea Scouts have long been closely tied together.

The upcoming jamboree this summer will be the first with a significant number of girl in attendance.

What's also not mentioned is the fact that nonmember troops allow women scoutmasters, or the fact that some of the staff and merit badge counselors at Scout Camp are women.

[skmo]

I sent the following to the church on the lds.org website. I plan to write a few actual handwritten letters saying the same thing but with more emphasis. I'd really like to see this movement grow legs. Long legs. Quickly.

I agree completely with loving our fellow man and accepting the sinner while not the sin. As an adult I see the benefit of associating with different people. However, I cannot accept or support the church's position on Boy Scouting. Our youth are being taught values and standards that will have to carry them throughout their lives. This includes values of morality and sexuality. Our children are already being bombarded with the need to accept homosexuality in schools, with the television shows and movies they see, in news stories. Associations involved with the LDS Church should be a respite from these unwholesome influences. It is admirable to teach our children the need to accept all people with love and understanding in spite of their imperfections. It is another to say we support and endorse an organization which teaches these practices should be allowed. We teach our children to eschew evil, and yet send them into an organization that says evil is okay. Isn't the troubled turbulence of youth difficult enough without getting this mixed message?

[skmo]

By the way, this is a first for me. I have never criticized the church for an official policy nor spoken against the organization as a whole for one of its decisions. I'm not entirely comfortable with it, but I must do what I feel compelled to do. I will say that if I am commanded to accept it, I sustain my leaders and will do so. There are already things I do which I don't understand, and my faith and testimony are sufficient to weather a few bumps. However, until my heart changes or I am told to cease and desist, I plan to speak out on this chucrch policy as much as I can.

[Thinker]

I sent the following to the church on the lds.org website. I plan to write a few actual handwritten letters saying the same thing but with more emphasis. I'd really like to see this movement grow legs. Long legs. Quickly.

I agree completely with loving our fellow man and accepting the sinner while not the sin. As an adult I see the benefit of associating with different people. However, I cannot accept or support the church's position on Boy Scouting. Our youth are being taught values and standards that will have to carry them throughout their lives. This includes values of morality and sexuality. Our children are already being bombarded with the need to accept homosexuality in schools, with the television shows and movies they see, in news stories. Associations involved with the LDS Church should be a respite from these unwholesome influences. It is admirable to teach our children the need to accept all people with love and understanding in spite of their imperfections. It is another to say we support and endorse an organization which teaches these practices should be allowed. We teach our children to eschew evil, and yet send them into an organization that says evil is okay. Isn't the troubled turbulence of youth difficult enough without getting this mixed message?

I respect that you sent that and hope more do.
I sent a letter to the BSA indicating that I hope they maintain integrity of the BSA by not allowing those who are openly practicing homosexual fetishes to not be allowed to be in the BSA - sleeping in tents with others who are possible temptations.

As I mentioned in the other thread, it isn't realistic to expect young boys to have the tools to heal another boy of homosexual fetishes. Professionals with doctoral degrees may be, but not young boys. Even "straight" adults have had a hard time in resisting homosexual preying in LDS universities - boys are even less mature and experienced.

[firend]

I think I read 4 out of 5 involved in scouts surveyed in salt lake county were against lifting the ban.

So what is next?

First we have obama signing the hate bill

Than we have the church supporting "gay rights" in salt lake county which injures any good Christian when it comes to things like who they can hire or fire, etc

Than we have the church softening its stance on gays, saying as long as you don't act on it you are ok....you can have the thoughts and desires and still be deemed worthy.

Now we have support for lifting the gay ban in the scouts.

And next?

Anyone see a pattern here?

[katmr]

Could this pertain to what is happening here?

Isaiah 9:16

16 For the leaders of this people cause them to err; and they that are led of them are destroyed.

[BroJones]

Hold on! I think we should consider that President Spencer W Kimball was (and is) a Prophet; he wrote in "The Miracle of Forgiveness":

Sin of the Ages
Homosexuality is an ugly sin, repugnant to those who find no temptation in it, as well as to many past offenders who are seeking a way out of its clutches. It is embarrassing and unpleasant as a subject for discussion but because of its prevalence, the need to warn the uninitiated, and the desire to help those who may already be involved with it, it is discussed in this chapter.

This perversion is defined as "sexual desire for those of the same sex or sexual relations between individuals of the same sex," whether men or women. It is a sin of the ages. It was present in Israel's wandering days as well as after and before. It was tolerated by the Greeks. It was prevalent in decaying Rome. The ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are symbols of wretched wickedness more especially related to this perversion, as the incident of Lot's visitors indicates. (See Gen. 19:5.) So degenerate had Sodom become that not ten righteous people could be found (see Gen. 18:23-32), and the Lord had to destroy it. But the revolting practice has persisted. As far back as Henry the Eighth this vice was referred to as "the abominable and detestable crime against nature." Some of our own statutes have followed that apt and descriptive wording.

Sin in sex practices tends to have a "snowballing" effect. As the restraints fall away, Satan incites the carnal man to ever-deepening degeneracy in his search for excitement until in many instances he is lost to any former considerations of decency. Thus it is that through the ages, perhaps as an extension of homosexual practices, men and women have sunk even to seeking sexual satisfactions with animals.

Unnatural and Wrong
All such deviations from normal, proper heterosexual relationships are not merely unnatural but wrong in the sight of God. Like adultery, incest, and bestiality they carried the death penalty under the Mosaic law.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death—.

And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast.

And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death—. (Lev. 20:13, 15-16.)

The law is less severe now, and so regrettably is the community's attitude to these grave sins-another evidence of the deterioration of society. In some countries the act per se is not even illegal. This "liberalizing" process is reflected in the United States by communities of homosexuals in our larger cities who demand acceptance of their deviate beliefs and practices as "normal," who sponsor demonstrations and draw up petitions to this end, who are formally organized, and who even print their own perverted journals. All this is done in the open, to the detriment alike of impressionable minds, susceptible urges, and our national decency.

But let us emphasize that right and wrong, righteousness and sin, are not dependent upon man's interpretations, conventions and attitudes. Social acceptance does not change the status of an act, making wrong into right. If all the people in the world were to accept homosexuality, as it seems to have been accepted in Sodom and Gomorrah, the practice would still be deep, dark sin.

Wow!

Those who would claim that the homosexual is a third sex and that there is nothing wrong in such associations can hardly believe in God or in his scriptures. If God did not exist, such an unnatural and improper practice might be viewed differently, but one could never justify it while accepting the holy scriptures.

That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, Justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still. (D&C 88: 35.)

Paul pinpointed the problem relating to all sexual sins and perversions when he wrote:

Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.

If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. (1 Cor. 3:16-17.)

Threat to Family Life
Of the adverse social effects of homosexuality none is more significant than the effect on marriage and home. The normal, God-given sexual relationship is the procreative act between man and woman in honorable marriage. It was so expressed and commanded to the first man and woman on the earth:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth—. (Gen. 1:27-28.)

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. (Moses 3:24.)

Marriage is ordained of God to men, and Paul tells Timothy that those who forbid to marry have departed from the faith and have given heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. (1 Tim. 4:1, 3.) "Neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord." (1 Cor. 11:11.) The concept has been reiterated in our own dispensation:

And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God for marriage is ordained of God unto man.

Wherefore, it is lawful that be should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation. (D&C 49:15-17.)
The institution of marriage is further elevated in the 132nd Section of the Doctrine and Covenants, wherein the Lord makes clear that only through the eternal union of man and woman can they achieve eternal life. As an example, he says that the wife is given to the man "to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified." (D&C 132:63.) Such references of course relate to celestial marriage.

In this context, where stands the perversion of homosexuality? Clearly it is hostile to God's purpose in that it negates his first and great commandment to "multiply and replenish the earth." If the abominable practice became universal it would depopulate the earth in a single generation. It would nullify God's great program for his spirit children in that it would leave countless unembodied spirits in the heavenly world without the chance for the opportunities of mortality and would deny to all the participants in the practice the eternal life God makes available to us all.

As Grievous as Adultery
Because of the seriousness of this sin it carries a heavy penalty for the unrepentant. The offender may realize that dis-fellowshipment or excommunication is the penalty for heavy petting, adultery, fornication and comparable sins if there is not adequate repentance, yet he often supposes that because his acts have not been committed with the opposite sex he is not in sin. Let it therefore be clearly stated that the seriousness of the sin of homosexuality is equal to or greater than that of fornication or adultery; and that the Lord's Church will as readily take action to disfellowship or excommunicate the unrepentant practicing homosexual as it will the unrepentant fornicator or adulterer.

Church Program for Assistance
Recognizing the seriousness of this problem in modern society and the need which offenders have to be assisted back to normal living, the Church has appointed two of its General Authorities to help on a Church level. Under the direction of the two Brethren many have been helped in faraway places, as well as in areas near the Church headquarters, through the bishops and stake presidents concerned. The success of this rehabilitation program has become known to the police, the courts and the judges, who refer many cases directly to the two Brethren, sometimes on a probation basis.

Curable and Forgivable-With Effort
After consideration of the evil aspects, the ugliness and prevalence of the evil of homosexuality, the glorious thing to remember is that it is curable and forgivable. The Lord has promised that all sins can be forgiven except certain ones enumerated, and this evil was not among those named. Thus it is forgivable if totally abandoned and if the repentance is sincere and absolute. Certainly it can be overcome, for there are numerous happy people who were once involved in its clutches and who have since completely transformed their lives. Therefore to those who say that this practice or any other evil is incurable, I respond: "How can you say the door cannot be opened until your knuckles are bloody, till your head is bruised, till your muscles are sore? It can be done."

Of course it is not to be had merely for the asking. It involves mastering self. Plato had a word to say on this: "The first and greatest victory is to conquer yourself; to be conquered by yourself is of all things most shameful and vile."

Our ills are usually of our own begetting. They must be corrected by ourselves. Man is the master of his destiny, be it good or bad. Man has the inherent capacity to heal himself physically. A doctor may cleanse a wound, sew it up, bandage it well, but the natural power of the body must do the healing. Likewise, a healing process in the spirit and mind must come from within from self-will. Others may help to cauterize the wound, suture it, and provide a clean, proper environment for the healing, but the body, with the aid of the Spirit, must heal itself. Accordingly some totally conquer homosexuality in a few months, others linger on with less power and require more time to make the total comeback. The cure is as permanent as the individual makes it and, like the cure for alcoholism, is subject to continued vigilance.

Men have come to their Church leaders dejected, discouraged, embarrassed, terrified, and have gone out later full of confidence and faith in themselves, enjoying self-respect and the confidence of their families. In some cases, wives have come in to express tearful thanks for bringing their husbands back to them. They have not always known what the problem was, but they had sensed it and realized they had lost their husbands. Men have come first with downward glances and have left the final interview months later looking the interviewer straight in the eye. After the first interview, some have admitted: "I'm glad I was arrested. I have tried and tried to correct my error but knew I'd have to have help and had not the courage to ask for it."

Of all the numerous people who have come through this special Church program, very few have been excommunicated. (These few were belligerent and rebellious and unyielding, and practically demanded such action.) Our method is one we think would be approved by the Savior. We remind the person of his likeness to and affinity with God:

And I, God created man in mine own image, in the image of mine Only Begotten created I him; male and female created I them. (Moses 2:27.)

The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency. (Moses 7:32.)

This kind of approach of helpfulness, not condemnation; of understanding, not accusations; of sympathy, not threats-this has brought many men to their knees in surrender and gratitude and helped them back to normality. With this inspiration a person has new hope. If he is in the image of God he is impelled to reach upward, for he must now be like God whose son he is. He has new handholds. He is no longer low and degenerate. He must climb up.

Continued contact seems to be helpful. To have the man return to report success in his efforts or even to tell of partial failure is helpful, and to these continuing visits much credit is due for recoveries. An additional strength comes from the realization that they will be making reports, and people thus control themselves and their thoughts a day at a time, a week at a time; and soon the months have passed and their thoughts are under control and their actions are above reproach.

Thus our approach is a positive one, dwelling upon the glories of the gospel and all its blessings, the happiness of proper family life, the joy in individual cleanliness. Its success is reflected in the numerous lives blessed with complete recovery.

Acceptance of Personal Responsibility Vital
As with any other sin, forgiveness and recovery are dependent upon the offender's repentance, which begins with recognition of the sin and acceptance of personal responsibility for it. There are those who are deeply entrenched in the habit and have no apparent desire to cleanse themselves and build toward a moral life. They are belligerent and totally uncooperative.

One young man persistently lied. He kept insisting that he be told who had reported on him. It was made clear to him that the important thing was not who reported but how soon he placed himself in the way of spiritual medication. As he left the room, he was told kindly, "You apparently do not wish to discuss the problem tonight.

You will before long, and you Bill find the door open and our hearts warm toward you." Several months passed and we heard nothing from him; then the phone rang one day, and there he was asking for an appointment. He came to see us and he unburdened his soul voluntarily, relief settled down upon him, and he began his comeback.

Next in seriousness to nonrecognition of the sin is the attempt to justify oneself in this perversion. Many have been misinformed that they are powerless in the matter, not responsible for the tendency, and that "God made them that way." This is as untrue as any other of the diabolical lies Satan has concocted. It is blasphemy. Man is made in the image of God. Does the pervert think God to be "that way"?

To those weaklings who argue this way, James answers:
Blessed is the man that endureth [i.e., resisteth] temptation: for then he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

Let no man say when he is tempted. I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed.

Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
Do not err, my beloved brethren. (Jas. 1:12-16.)
Sometimes not heavenly but earthly parents get the blame. Granted that certain conditions make it easier for one to become a pervert, the Second Article of Faith teaches that a man will be punished for his own sins. He can, if normal, rise above the frustrations of childhood and stand on his own feet.

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son—. (Ezek. 18:20.)

A man may rationalize and excuse himself till the groove is so deep he cannot get out without great difficulty. But temptations come to all people. The difference between the reprobate and the worthy person is generally that one yielded and the other resisted. And if the yielding person continues to give way he may finally reach the point of "no return." The Spirit will "not always strive with man." (D&C 1:33.)

Some say that marriage has failed. And while the number of divorces causes us to fear and admit it partly to be true, the principle of marriage is right. Some have changed their desires and yearnings and have convinced themselves that they are different and have no desire toward the opposite sex. This is quite understandable if the person has permitted himself to move in the other direction and has lavished his interests, desires, affections, and passions upon one of his own sex for long enough. It becomes ingrown. But let this individual repent of his perversion, force himself to return to normal pursuits and interests and actions and friendships with the opposite sex, and this normal pattern can become natural again.

Again -- the Prophet is saying that a man or woman can conquer what?

"some totally conquer homosexuality in a few months, others linger on with less power and require more time to make the total comeback. The cure is as permanent as the individual makes it and, like the cure for alcoholism, is subject to continued vigilance."