There’s an awful lot of “hate” being thrown around on-line and in the media these days. Mormons and evangelicals hate gays. Chick-fil-A (the business and apparently, every employee of the company, by definition), hates gays. A deranged gunman hated Sikhs. Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church and his cronies hate Sikhs-even tweeting that “God sent another shooter.” Haters gonna hate. Don’t be a hater. You get the picture . . .
I’m not a Sikh and I’m not an evangelical Christian, but I am a Mormon, so I want to weigh in on this issue. I’ve known a lot of Mormons in my life. I’ve known some pretty dogmatic ones; I’ve known some (ha, who am I kidding?: many) very traditional ones. I’ve known some pretty fearful ones (like the one who recently told Stuart that he should be scared to go to the movie theater in our po-dunk town because movie theaters are no longer safe after the Aurora shooting). But I actually haven’t known any Mormons who hate gays.
I don’t want anyone to think I’m making excuses for the Mormon church, so let me be very clear: I disagree with the institutional Mormon church’s position on homosexuality and on same-sex marriage. I disagree vehemently with many Mormons that sexual orientation is something we choose and that it’s a “challenge” some people just have to deal with in this life. I disagree that it’s a “burden” that will be taken away from gay people in the hereafter. I disagree that we should be advocating for “traditional marriage” to continue to be codified legally as being between one man and one woman. I disagree with and deeply regret the Mormon church’s involvement in the Prop 8 debacle in California.
And I disagree that Mormons hate gays. That word just doesn’t feel right to me. It doesn’t apply, in my experience.
I learned to love people-all different kinds of people-from Mormon parents and from Mormon Sunday School teachers, Mormon youth group leaders, and Mormon bishops in backwoods East Texas. We’re talking good ole’ boys here. We’re talking about some of the most conservative people you could find. We’re talking “Bubbas.”
Yet none of them taught me to hate. They taught me that we are children of God-each of us-and that the worth of souls is great in the sight of God.
So I cringe when I read or hear discussions wherein people assert that Mormons hate gays.
Make no mistake: I want desperately for my church to lead the way on a human rights or a social justice issue rather than dragging our feet behind us decades after everyone else. I want my church leaders to say-loudly and clearly and unequivocally-that we want and need all the currently-marginalized people (the smokers, the people with tattoos, the gays, the feminists, the “so-called intellectuals,” the women in pants or-God forbid-sleeveless dresses, the men in our former Spanish-speaking congregation who passed the sacrament in Raiders jerseys, the “partially-active,” the men with facial hair, the men in purple shirts rather than Peter-Priesthood-white, and the non-literal believers) to stay in our congregations.
And I want them to create policies that reflect that need.
Despite all those wishes and disagreements, and despite the harm wrought upon many current and former LGBTQ Mormons, I don’t think hate is the best word to use to describe Mormons’ attitudes and behaviors towards gays. Let’s find another word that more accurately reflects most (many? some?) Mormons’ position on homosexuality because hate just doesn’t ring true for this backwoods east Texas Mormon girl.
In my experience – which is considerable, having a number of gay LDS family members and close friends, and having served many years in priesthood leadership positions – the more deeply religious the Mormon, the more likely they are to ACCEPT, not reject a closet-emerging gay loved one or acquaintance. Often with heavy heart, perhaps with a sense of loss (if only for the life they wanted for the loved one). Sometimes taking time to come to terms with the new frame of reference. But always in the end embracing the person and taking him or her at their word that it wasn’t a choice.
The few Mormons I have seen react with rejection, on the other hand, have always treated their faith as a battlefield rather than a source of peace. In my observation, their faith is fervent but shallow. Their comments in Sunday school and Priesthood classes always draw attention to the sins of others and seldom seem to recognize areas where whatever “we” they identify with may fall short. They are hypersensitive to criticisms of the Church, reacting in a defensive way that suggests to me an easily threatened testimony. They do see themselves as valiant, devout Latter-day Saints but cannot seem to carry a conversation longer than five minutes without sneering at somebody or something.
One other observation: This is not a liberal / conservative thing. The overwhelming majority of people I know in the first group are very much on the right, both politically and theologically. The deciding factor really does seem to be whether the gospel of Jesus Christ brings them peace or whether they see their religion in more epic, militant terms.
Your experience is mostly the same as my NoVA/DC experience in the Church. I actually ended up with a handful of (open and closeted) gay friends in HS and it never even occurred to me that I should call them to repentance/avoid them or treat them any differently. In fact, my Mormon upbringing led me to treat them well and above the standard high school homophobia (though that’s not saying much).
I will cite one wrinkle – I had a teachers quorum adviser who once spent a whole lesson on that awful BKP pamphlet describing an missonary who punched his aggressive homosexual companion. “Does that mean we can gay bash?” one of my friends asked. “I’m not saying you can’t” my adviser replied. My father was furious when I told him about it.
Christian J, ack! What a terrible example. I hate that talk. Just terrible.
However, I feel like *most* Mormons would NOT think it’s okay to “gay bash.” Unfortunately, in many ways, I feel like like the average Mormon is better at this than some of the church leaders (which makes sense if you look at the ages of the church leaders). And the church curriculum is so dang old and outdated . . .
Such a good question, Heather. I’m meeting more and more Mormons who are actively pursuing gay rights, although they stick to the belief that, deep down, homosexuality is “a sin.” I think that would be something really difficult to do well, love the sinner and hate the sin, even though that is what church members are taught to do, right? Ah, such a tough issue.
How can a person that is gay, who is associated with the church not feel hated when BKP says this:
We teach the standard of moral conduct that will protect us from Satan’s many substitutes and counterfeits for marriage. We must understand that any persuasion to enter into any relationship that is not in harmony with the principles of the gospel must be wrong. From The Book of Mormon we learn that “wickedness never was happiness.”
Some suppose that they were preset, and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so. Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, he is our Father.
Paul promised, “God will not suffer you to be tempted above what ye are able, but will, with the temptation, also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (paraphrased I Cor 10:13)
You can if you will, break the habits, and conquer the addiction, and come away from that which is not worthy of any member of the Church. As Alma cautioned, we must watch and pray continually. Isaiah warned of them that call evil good and good evil. That put darkness for light and light for darkness. That put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. (conference talk October 2010)
The odious talk in question (at which I was both physically present and wincing madly) was delivered at a time when even the psychiatric community was still not entirely disengaged from the idea that homosexuality was a form of mental illness. How much less a World War 2 vet social conservative raised in Depression-era Brigham City? Nor did it help that in the 1970s, the (out) LGBT community was, incredible as it seems, defending same-sex attraction with terms like “choice” and “lifestyle.”
The more lesbians and gays feel safe to come out, the more Mormon attitudes (and doctrine) will evolve as people realize how many of those they know and love have same-sex orientation… and how little that matters. Put another way if you like: “The Lord is extending the Saints’ understanding.”
“The Lord is extending the Saints’ understanding.”
thank you, Dean. I agree.
I think Mormons frequently say to themselves “but I don’t feel hatred for anyone” and just dismiss the concept. But that completely misses the point. It is not your subjective feelings or intentions that are in question here, but rather how your actions and words are reasonably and objectively experienced by someone else. Hate can in involve more than feelings, it can refer to the expression of enmity or active hostility (and actions are often more expressive than words). I think your church is bad for you, and so with the best of intentions I am going to seek to have its property confiscated and its practices made illegal. But I don’t hate you or feel anything but love for you. Are you convinced?
Or you can make it as simple as the “love the sinner and hate the sin” concept which is so absurd in this context. I think your clitoris is evil and should be cut off of you when you are young, but please understand, I don’t hate women. It is for their own good.
The thing to be understood here is that is doesn’t matter how one subjectively frames their actions in their own mind. Almost any evil actions or belief can be twisted into a paternal concern in ones own mind. The question is whether you have the right to strike at what to another is something fundamental and immutable about themselves and ask them not to view that as an expression of active hostility towards their very person. In other words, to view it as hate.
Matthew, you are right–it is often used by people to just wash their hands of the issue: “I don’t hate,” therefore I don’t have to worry about it anymore.
Absolutely love Dean’s reference to “The Spirit of God”–“The Lord is extending the saints’ understanding…” We should all be able to acknowledge that in a diverse, worldwide church this is essential…and may also take time.
Crowley, I totally agree that the “hating the sin not he sinner” attitude is a huge problem in this context especially. I also think that hate can be manifested with a smile on your face and with your own version of paternal “best intentions” in your heart.
However, the use of the word is greatly abused in our civil/political discourse to the point that it loses meaning.
I think Matthew Crowley pins it down well. I’ve known lots and lots of Mormons who’ve repeatedly insisted “I DON’T *HATE* GAYS,” and I believe those people. They don’t feel enmity or anger or any other extremely negative emotion connected with their actions of “standing up for what I believe in” or “defending my traditional family” or “protecting the institution of marriage.”
There is no animosity in their hearts, so they are baffled when others accuse them of hating. They insist, “you cannot read my mind and you don’t know what I am feeling” and they are right – we cannot know what another person is feeling unless they articulate that to us. (Although I suspect that if they walk around saying “God hates [this thing/act]” there’s probably a good chance that they, too, hate the thing/act just as much. We humans tend to ascribe our feelings to God when we get backed into defending them.
But just because somebody says, “I don’t hate you” doesn’t mean that their actions express lovingkindness and acceptance. And it’s pretty hard to believe someone cares about you when they’re trying to prevent you from marrying the person you love, providing for your own children, or standing up for yourself. At the very least is patronizing and condescending to be told somebody else knows what’s better for your life.
Theoretically, some education about the effects of actions would help people understand how their words are meaningless without actions that back those words up. If you love me, you will invite me into your home, you will welcome my significant other, you will recognize my children, you will want my family to be as secure and intact and strong as you want you family to be. If you love me, you won’t find ways to make me Other by making disparaging remarks about my “lifestyle” – especially when my lifestyle and your lifestyle look the same 98% of the time.
I agree that a persons actions can show another their hatred without the person knowing they hate.
I was in a 5th Sunday combined meeting in California during the Prop8 time and I felt incredibly uncomfortable, and I thought what was being expressed was hatred. The spirit of the Lord certainly wasn’t there.
I think the fact that Mormons would do something like Prop 8 without having a knowledge that what they were doing was profoundly harmful, speaks to whether or not we love them. We did not consider how we would be harming people with our actions, our money, our efforts. Then, lo, some of our own children felt the sting of our actions too keenly and they committed suicide.
I don’t know if we can call it hate, but we can certainly and absolutely call it an absence of love or concern.
An action that would help the church is to disavow association with the Boy Scouts. By continuing are association, we are telling any gays that we do not want you here. The practice of exclusion has run deep. We exclude through subtle ways like this.
Here is a story: I coached my 11 year old daughter’s basketball team last year. We hold practice at the school gyms. The gym was not open and I know the church gym was available on the Friday after Thanksgiving. I used it one other time in December. The Bishop was one of those times. The parents of all the girls who are non-members came to the building to wait for their daughters twice. (The church building is a 15 minute to 20 minute drive from our town gyms) Some had said they had not been in a church building in years. These are nice upstanding members of the community and would be nice to have as members.
On a Saturday morning in February, my daughter and I had a game in the same town as the church. We stopped by the church to shoot before the game. There was a meeting going on in another room. The following Sunday, the Bishop asked to talk to me after church. After an hour, I called me in to tell me the handbook tells him I cannot have practices at the church. (Why he could not have told me this in the hall when he asked me to see him after church, I do not know) My conclusion is that having upstanding members of the community inside the church building for a couple hours is not good because I was not following the “rules.”
My daughters and their friends have been asked to leave dances because one person thought their dresses was inappropriate. (I was in the bishopric at the time and had sent them to the dance with a dance card.) One could conclude that there are desirables and undesirables. I, as an undesirable, sit with the cheap-seaters.