29 August 2007


and the Great Purge of ‘07

It’s been far too long since anyone has attempted a purge.

Previous attempts were (let’s face it) feeble, at best. One attempt was a shame-on-you attack that sought to get the Undesirables to leave on their own. The second attempt was an appeal-to-elitism attack that sought create a divide between the Undesirables and the Regular Folk.

Yawn-inducing, I know. The latest purge attempt, however, is much more interesting.

In the evening of August 20th, Crow stated, “I personally am beginning to think these blogs are a dangerous thing because I think a lot of false doctrine is being mingled with scripture and being passed off as the gospel.“

And what does one do with dangerous things? Ban them, of course.

Earlier that day Crow opined, “The only thing that really concerns me is that this. This and other blogs are linked to a site that is supposed to be faith promoting and provide solid gospel advice and support to those of us who struggle.”

The site Crow is referring to is Northern Lights. There are, of course, many unique individuals linked to the official blog of North Star.* Some are gay women in straight marriages, some are gay men who wear women’s jeans and wax their eyebrows, and all are in a different place in regards to their testimony and understanding of church doctrine.

So is it possible that Crow is merely offering a critique of blogs he views as less than faithful? Could he simply be suggesting that we should choose who’s advice we take a little more carefully? Perhaps some blogs are just less of a valuable resource than others.


For Crow, it‘s all or nothing, “I believe that things are black and white, good or evil. Either they glorify and uplift or the bring down and destroy.” He continues, “Yes there is a gap in the middle and various hues of gray… I think its in the gray that Satan dwells.” (emphasis mine)

We certainly can’t allow Satanic blogs to be linked to Northern Lights, now can we?

*Is everyone aware that North Star is a Gay Rodeo association? Also, Northstar is a gay superhero currently in a relationship with Colossus.


good tune

22 August 2007


you can read about these and many more words at m-w.com


Function: noun

1 a : a race or contest in which an artificial advantage is given or disadvantage imposed on a contestant to equalize chances of winning b : an advantage given or disadvantage imposed usually in the form of points, strokes, weight to be carried, or distance from the target or goal
2 a : a disadvantage that makes achievement unusually difficult b sometimes offensive : a physical disability


Function: transitive verb

1 : to make ineffective or powerless : CRIPPLE
2 : to cripple by cutting the leg tendons


I submit for your consideration: a gay Mormon male isn’t handicapped. For to believe homosexuality to be a “disadvantage that makes achievement unusually difficult” is to believe that God sent me to Earth with a disadvantage that blocks life’s supreme achievement; such being marriage for all eternity.

Rather, I submit that gay Mormons are hamstrung; having been severed from their basic God-given needs for intimate companionship. Needs that could easily be obtained for there is no physical disability to prevent such happiness and contentment.

*This post was inspired by Neal.* Thank you, Neal. I’ve been kicking this post around in my head for a while now.


good tune

15 August 2007

Me Ubico

curious about bisexuality is not the same as bi-curious

I wonder about the idea "there are no true bisexuals." I have seen this occasionally in my studies of homosexuality.* Sexuality, like everything humans experience, exists on a sliding scale. No man is purely Libertarian; no two green crayons exactly alike.

Any man can be rest anywhere between the poles of masculine and feminine or promiscuous and celibate. Even biological distinctions such as male and female can vary in very obvious ways.

The same is true of sexual attraction. Some like females more than males and some like both.

Someone out there might want to know where I place on the Kinsey Scale. So would I.

Over the years the Kinsey Scale has evolved into a sort of self-applied metric for sexual attraction. Some use it to describe behavior or mannerisms. Others use it as the author intended: to establish the ratio of gay:straight sexual encounters. Most prefer to use the Kinsey Scale to describe how attracted one is to other men and/or women.

I'll use the more popular version of the Kinsey Scale and place myself on the continuum. "Zero" meaning “only attracted to females” and "Six" meaning "only attracted to males.” I'll justify my placement with my personal feelings and attractions. So here it goes:

I am a Six.

(Unless Seven has become available.)

*Dr. Ruth believes this. I like to think of Dr. Ruth as the mother with the world's most embarrassed children.


good tune

08 August 2007

You’re Win

calling all married folks. come in, married folks.

Over at Northern lights, FoxyJ confessed the astounding fact that she has never seen her husband pee. This is a result of a rule established early in the relationship that made the bathroom an “off-limits” area.

For her part, FoxyJ doesn’t believe not seeing her husband pee has not been a detriment to their marriage.

My question: How could this be a detriment to the their marriage or anyone else’s marriage?

This I understand: Seeing each other pee is a common marriage event caused by two people who share everything including a single bathroom.

This I don’t understand: Not seeing one’s spouse pee sometimes damages a relationship.

How can this situation damage a relationship? What kind of damage can this cause?*

If any of you know the answers (especially you married types) please feel free to comment below.

*Also, how many of you out there have rules about stuff like this?


good tune

02 August 2007

The Oaks-Wickman Statement of 1976

part one

PUBLIC AFFAIRS: At the outset, can you explain why this whole issue of blacks and the priesthood is important to the Church?

ELDER OAKS: This is much bigger than just a question of whether or not society should be more tolerant of blacks. Over past years we have seen unrelenting pressure from advocates of the negroes to accept them as normal and to characterize those who disagree as narrow-minded, bigoted and unreasonable. Such advocates are quick to demand freedom of speech and thought for themselves, but equally quick to criticize those with a different view and, if possible, to silence them by applying labels like “racist.” In at least one country where negro activists have won major concessions, we have even seen a church pastor threatened with prison for preaching from the pulpit that homosexual behavior is sinful. Given these trends, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must take a stand on doctrine and principle. This is more than a social issue — ultimately it may be a test of our most basic religious freedoms to teach what we know our Father in Heaven wants us to teach.


PUBLIC AFFAIRS: So you are saying that the desire to be treated equally is controllable?

ELDER WICKMAN: One of the great sophistries of our age, I think, is that merely because one has been born to a certain bloodline, that therefore the inclination to want what white members have is inevitable. That’s contrary to our very nature as the Lord has revealed to us. We do have the power to control our whining.


PUBLIC AFFAIRS: If we were to look back at someone who was born black, and we were to look at their parents who might have been born black, some might identify a genetic influence in that.

ELDER OAKS: No, we do not accept the fact that conditions that prevent people from attaining their eternal destiny were born into them without any ability to control. That is contrary to the Plan of Salvation, and it is contrary to the justice and mercy of God. It’s contrary to the whole teaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which expresses the truth that by or through the power and mercy of Jesus Christ we will have the strength to do all things. That includes resisting temptation. That includes dealing with things that we’re born with, including disfigurements, or mental or physical incapacities. None of these stand in the way of our attaining our eternal destiny.


good tune