Monday, February 22, 2010


Labels are defining/stifling
I have been sifting through received communications, and I gotta tell you that I love that there are questions. I love that there seems to be dialogue opened up for those mohos wishing to remain in the church and follow the teachings. There seems to be many out there, some of whom have great blogs and essays. I pray that I am one. One of the letters I received is from a man who feels that I am not gay enough. Jeesh! What's a guy gotta do.

Don't answer that.

Here is an abbreviated version of someones concern.

I question if your feelings for men were there always, or were something you developed over the years (and if so, what sorts of habits did you endeavor to yield such a consequence)? You married a woman for crying out loud. There's two possibilities there. At the time you married her, either you were sincerely and genuinely attracted to her--in which case you're not gay at least not 100% in a genuine manner, OR you weren't as attracted to her and really just faked it because you instead were more attracted to and more in love with pleasing god than your wife.

First, thank you so much for your letter. It allows us to discuss. I will start this off directly.

Is the concept that "gayness" is something one develops or learns over the years still being repeated? I thought that this line of thought was for the religious right wingers. I was born homosexual. It is not something that developed due to abuse or neglect. I have stated this from the beginning (waaay back to this blogs beginning - December 2009).

Second, there are only two reasons you can think of, Dear Reader, for a homosexual man to marry a woman? I truly question both the reasoning and your creativity. I will never be Mensa material, but even I can come up with more reasons than that with my right brain tied behind my back. For one, how 'bout finding someone you love that loves you back and is willing to take a chance on you? Like, you know, a marriage?

I don't mean to wax sarcastic. I am sometimes amazed at and marveled by the ability of humans to defend our own at the expense of others – including my own penchant. Without using sarcasm let me ask, if I choose blue are you wrong for choosing red? Should I feel guilty for my color choice? Should you?

Do I put your choice down simply be choosing differently than you?

I am a BYU fan. Hugely so. I don't know if it is because I schooled there or because I think of BYU as the church school. Both, I guess. I have one friend who is a U fan. It could happen.

I didn't realize when I choose to be a BYU fan that it was automatically assumed that I would think of University of Utah as my enemy. It has certainly worked out that way. My wife is more mature than I am - one of the reasons I love her. She cheers for her team, not against the others. That is the type of person I would like to be; the kind of fan that cheers for my team rather than cheers against the opponent.

So, am I "in love with pleasing God" as was asked? It is a romantic notion worthy of the sensitive man I feel that I am and always have been. Though I wouldn't use those terms, "in love with pleasing God", I understand what was asked, and I think that they are good words and true. Yes. Truth told, I am in love with the idea that my father would be pleased with me. I did marry my wife in a big part because I felt his guidance in doing so. He guides me because he wants what is best for me. He wants what is best for my wife, too. I both love my wife and am desirous to protect her, and I love the Lord for allowing me the privilege of doing so.

I have risked everything in what I feel is a just and right cause - and I am not talking about blogging. I am talking about the life choices I have made. That she has made also. It is worth the risk.


  1. Ute fan here. And just because I'm a Ute fan does not mean that I hate BYU.

    Okay, yes it does. I see your point. Can't we all just get along, I ask?

  2. I know it is so off the point, but is there really such thing as a U fan? My experence is that there are BYU fans, and Anti BYU fans who have picked a red hat. Lots of BYU haters out there. Haters are the new black. It seems easy to be against something, harder to be pro-anything.

  3. Alright, I hope this isn't too off topic. Actually it is probably a subject for you to blog about on another day if you so desire...

    As a fellow gay married mormon man, I know that we have some very clear benefits in having married women (for whatever the reason). There are also some difficulties for both us and our wives.

    My question is this: If you had a son who is gay, as he reaches adulthood would you push him towards marriage with a woman or towards a committed life with another man?

    I know, you probably are gonna say that you wouldn't "push" him in either direction. But, make it a hypothetical... you gotta push in one direction of the other - which is it gonna be?

  4. Or more to the point. The church no longer counsels gay men to get married. The reasons are obvious.

    I think you are more bi than you care to admit.

  5. Hey Sean, old friend. No one said the church councils anything. This is not a GA talk. And it appears that the writer is not gay enough for you either. “He can't really be gay”. If he is gay and still married it means you are a failure. Isn't that what the controversy is about? Isn't that why you oppose his stance?

  6. I don't oppose anything truthful.

    How would, "if he is gay and still married," make me a failure? His actions have no bearing on anyone else but himself.

    If he can get it up for women then he is clearly not exclusively attracted to men. Just as a "straight" man who can get it up for men might not be entirely straight. I understand that there is a lot crossover on the continuum from gay to bi to straight. If he's bi enough to be attracted to women and stay married then more power to him. Let's just be honest about it though.

    Re: the other stuff: Cal has said that he follows the "lord's anointed." Those "anointed" no longer counsel gay men to get married to women as they once did. The countless heartache and broken homes were finally too much.

  7. The point of the blog is that people make choices and respect the decisions of others. I don't see him attacking any way of life. I see people attacking him. And why are we talking about his sex life? I don't see him mentioning it. He says he loves his wife. Sex-is-love-is-sex-now? He loves a woman and wants to protect her so he must be bi? Lets get together and discredit this loon so we can all feel better about ourselves.

  8. We can count on a few to manipulate the point around to their benefit. This blog is for gay guys who want to try to follow the church teachings. Is the beef with the gay guy trying to follow, or the church for leading? Did the church tell him to marry? No. The spirit confirmed it he says. The focus is to listen to the spirit –ones relationship with god. It is not wither or not he can "get it up" (real nice, Sean) or wither or not the church councils gay men to marry. Your keeping the focus on his and others (mine) sexuality and integrity meant you can overlook that fact that he is trying to do something he and others feels is right.

  9. I love you all. I think. And you are ALL missing the point. The point is that the Utes suck!

    Thanks to Jeff in Co for the suggestion – will take you up on it.

    Sean, the answer is still no. I will not send you an autographed 8 x 10, so stop asking.

  10. Jeff, 1. yes, he has talked about his sex life on this blog. 2. If he has sex with women and gets aroused by them then there is some "bi" there? Why is this a remarkable statement? What is wrong with being bi?

    Matt, you want to follow the church teachings, but when they conflict with what you "feel" then the feelings take precedent. It's an easy way to justify just about anything.

  11. And the Utes do not suck. 2 National Championships in college football. One under Urban and one under Kyle.

  12. Point to clarify. I do not talk about my sex life with my wife. Out of respect for her, can that be off limits please?

    Second point, No national football championships for the U for Whit (2nd place) or Meyer, (Florida wins title later) - though the U won nationals in basketball NCAA, and NIT, and were in the finals ten-ish years ago. But I am not talking about records, tangibles, or anything substantial. I am talking general suckiness. And the U wins hands down!

    No wallet sized photos of me are available either, Sean.

  13. I am sorry. I meant to be funny. It was funny when I said it out-loud to myself – which may be why I am by myself today. Sorry U fans. If Gina says I was mean, then I was mean. I trust her.

    By the way Gina, are you a U fan or BYU?

    Just kidding.

    Wearing red or blue?

  14. Sean, I do want to follow church teachings. They do not conflict with want I want or feel. Why so personal? You are putting words into my mouth to support your opinion. Deflection and distraction - military tactics. Justification - politics. It does look like you put him down to build yourself up. Why so personal? If he succeeds, do you think that makes you a failure? I don't think anyone thinks that.

  15. I was just kidding about that being mean. I went to the U but in truth have never actually been to a game

  16. Yes, technically no "BSC" charade of a championship, but in my book beating Alabama in the Sugar Bowl and remaining undefeated qualified them. Much stronger than the weak case to be made for BYU in 1984.

  17. Agreed on the BCS. What a joke. Also on the Alabama/Utah Sugar Bowl. I hate to say it, but Utah deserved more that year.

    I will never say it again.