The M Word

Morality has become a great big giant negative M word.

It may have had something to do with the “Just Say No” campaigns of years ago that relied on guilt to decry the unchaste. I suppose that “Say yes to chastity” didn't have the same ring to it.

Plenty of blame to spread around, however, between the fractions who equate pleasure with happiness and place sexual lust in the place of, or confuse it with love.

We, as a culture, seem at ease with handing over our freedoms and our responsibilities to, ...well, anyone and anything else - as if being driven largely by sexual impulse and remaining slave to base instinct is somehow desirable.

Morality has become a term defined by those who are characteristically immoral. And we accept their definition. We politely back off in submission as if we didn't have the right to think and feel for ourselves. Those "unchaste" claim that chastity is impossible, improbable, idiosyncratic and several other “i” words.

If I may be so bold, how on earth would they know? Sex is a need. Sex is the end. Sex is the only way for a large group of people who choose not to say say “No” to our ultimate physical sensual pleasure that is meant to empower and envelope. The matter with drop-of-the-hat-sexuality is one of self focus, gratification and satisfaction that may confine us to a prison of our own making – a prison because it keeps us from making more important and more evolved emotional and spiritual connections.

The Fire & Brimstone approach of promoting moral chastity may have had its place in our history. I think, as a people, we have traveled passed the prissy and through neurotic to a point where punitive threats of hell and pain no longer function as an effective barrier against the proposed sexual freedom.

I don't think threats ever effectively worked on me except as a youth. Don't cross the street or you will die. That was a big one for me. Don't smoke or you will die. That too. After a while I learned to dismiss the “Or you will die” pylosphpy to better behavior. Surely there was reasoning behind these admonitions. Do not self gratify or you will die! Or go blind! Or will suffer great psychological damage and walk with a limp!

The “Or you will die” campaigns of adolescence had their place. I myself have used them on my children when small to keep them out of danger. But, after the initial danger has passed and when I feel more information is appropriate, I expound. I do this in part because I remember wanting more information myself when I was younger. I never got it. Once I decided that, from experience, that I wouldn't actually “die” if I crossed the street or picked my nose, or... other things, and once I perceived that the promised physical harm did not materialize, then the guidelines lost their sting. This turned into "Don't force your moral value judgments on me!"

Many were of this same opinion. If the consequences ended up not being accurate, then was there any value to guidelines? We quickly have gone from “there is no real consequence” to “we cant help our behavior”, to “we don't need to help our behavior because everything is acceptable!” "All is well" as it were. We have no responsibility because we have no choice. It's genetic. Its nurture. Its not my doing. I'm just dancing, I didn't pick the music.

How demoralizing. Are they saying that I don't have a choice in the matter? That I am a slave to ...whatever I am incapable of mastering in a week? For whatever causes, we men have been deemed to be such moral midgets, ethical eunuchs and perpetual adolescents that we're incapable of transcending our sexual kicks.*

Do we really have any other alternative but to sleep in a bed that someone else made? Human nature rules, and there ain't nothing I can do? I learned to make my bed years ago, which isn't really true because I haven't made my bed for years. Lets try again.

Somewhere along the line I made the decision to rudder my own ship. (better!) It has not been perpetually calm sailing – though I would like to end this happily with one of those “ever-after” or “into the sunset” things. There is so much that I am not in control of, but I take great joy in what I can do.

I can choose how to react. I can act. I can deal with what I have with grace and style - as any man can.

If I believe in God, and that He made me in his own image, then I accept that I may have untapped powers and abilities. Choice is one.

And Now, For News From Our Sponsor...

A leading self proclaimed Ex-Gay was called on to resign from the board of a leading therapy group and asked to apologize to the LGBT community after the Miami New Times discovered that he took a male prostitute that he met online to Europe.

This man, a major anti-gay figure who has worked with the Family Research Council, was a board member of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality, and testified as an expert witness in favor of gay adoption bans in both Arkansas and Florida. He has also published several anti-gay books.

This is the second NARTH board member to be so exposed in the past three months. I'm not sure what NARTH means, but it looks important. In February, another leader of an Ex-gay group was discovered as having served prison time for bond fraud. He was the co-fonder of Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality (JONAH).

Its like a B movie, isn't it? Religious guy or Politician dude creating rules and gets caught with his pants down. And I am torn. I am embarrassed for this guy and the groups he represents. I am saddened to see that these groups will have to endure even more scrutiny that before, and am thrilled at the same time that these groups will be under even more scrutiny. I feel that they should have been under the microscope way before these recent developments.

In the general case of the later denouncement, are only those with no history of controversy allowed to serve communities? If Mr. JOHAH, the homo Jewish guy, has a legal past, does that make anything he says bunk? Yeah, probably. Doesn't give anyone else with a record or a past much hope though.

In the case of the former old ex-gay guy on vacation with Lil Abner the prostitute, has he become the poster child for all these ex gay groups well-meaning or otherwise? Yeah, probably. And all those type of organizations will be discredited along side. I don't know if they should be or shouldn't be painted with the same brush. Honestly, I don't know much about these men or these groups. Every group I have ever been in (all two of them) of gay guys that don't want to be gay anymore has been somewhat distasteful. I spent more time trying to ward off advances than at the actual meetings.

I know my experience is not universal. I know that there are those who are thriving with these groups. I also know that I wouldn't recommend most of these groups for anything other that refreshments.

There are ways to get what's needed if you, as a gay Mormon man are seeking help. Small odds of success generally. Not a lot of men in the press announcing their success. But it does happen.

And its only through the Savior.

Where Have All The Gay Guys Gone?

Kinsey says 10%.

This is a generally accepted figure in connection to number of homosexuals in society. Kinsey actually categorized men into six different groups, varying degrees of hetero and homo. The "ten percent" tends to be a combination of those who consider themselves gay and those who have had a gay experience but who may have moved on to something different.

Now lets throw Mormons into the mix. How many gay Mormons are in the church? Let us turn our scriptures to D&C 121, verse...

Yeah – if only it were that easy. If I had to bet the farm I would bet on the side of more rather than less - more homosexuals in the church than in society at large. I believe that the nature of the church lends itself to sensitive and caring, thoughtful, intelligent men – in much the same way as gay men are drawn to music and art, dance, movement, design and all things creative. It is not happenstance that the percentage of homosexuals gravitate to creative walk of life.

Is the Mormon church any less creative or challenging? Mormon men are taught to be creative, accountable, loving, generous, helpful, thrifty clean brave and reverent, good fathers and husbands. Do we think that these teachings and beliefs might possibly attract those men who have, either though choosing or though genetics, developed these talents and attributes on their own?

I do. I think the church attracts those who are sensitive to issues of the spirit. Many times I sit in priesthood meeting and list those that I know of with SGA to some degree or other. Often those I can count are beyond the 10% range into the 15 to 18% range. And it has never been a surprise to me.

I state this to disarm the notion that homo guys in the church are on their own. Of course this misguided notion will continue to predominate if we don't learn to talk and trust and confide in one another and in our leaders. If we feel as a Priesthood power and an organization that there is power in twos (and we do), then how about four groups of twos? In just one ward?

There are men who do not wish to divulge their homosexuality. Many reasons they have, and most of these reasons are downright respectable and responsible. First is that with sticking a homosexual name tag on their chest they bring themselves to scrutiny in public and private. A man may wish to not act on his homosexual tendencies, choosing to minimize that behavior and it's effects on himself and his family or his family prospects. He seems to have a handle on the beast, and I am not going to incest that he come out of a closet he may not have confined himself to in the first place.

There is power in a name. Rather than label myself based on sexual attraction, I prefer to label myself based on my cherished goal - man of God, or priesthood holder. Many feel this same way.

Second, why would such a man volunteer or speak out when "well enough" seems to be doing the job. No reason to make a speech or read a blog on a behavior "problem" that hadn't reached critical mass as a behavior - and may not ever get there. These men may never feel the need to speak with their ecclesiastical leader because, as far as behavior, it was never an issue. Chances are that it won't be for him. Lets leave this brother be in relative peace with his savior and his decision. They are fine without us.

I think there are many in this boat – who may have homosexual feelings but choose not to act on them because what they feel to be true - priesthood, commandments, temple commitment's – means more to them than sex. These are unselfish righteous men.

Obviously, there are many other Mormon homosexual men in many other circumstances, and I am not trying to peg or categorize or label unduly.

There are men not as secure, who are more than wondering about and imagining a homosexual behavior or two. Maybe he hasn't engaged, but can see it coming. This man may prosper with some assistance and council. A leader/coach he can relate to and confide in or someone who is going though the same issues may help.

Some have left the church to one degree or other. There may be some living double lives. I hope not. I wish them God speed and love. I have been there myself.

So, where are the Homosexual Mormon men of the Priesthood?

Sitting alongside their straight brethren. Going to church, home teaching, leading the singing or teaching primary or leading the scouts through the woods. Leading quorums and Wards or Stakes, and giving blessings and going to the temple.

Just like a regular guy.