If you’re a Quaker, like or reblog this. I want to follow you.
Surely it is the nature and quality of a relationship that matters: one must not judge it by its outward appearance but by its inner worth. Homosexual affection can be as selfless as heterosexual affection, and therefore we cannot see that it is in some way morally worse.
Homosexual affection may of course be an emotion which some find aesthetically disgusting, but one cannot base Christian morality on a capacity for disgust. Neither are we happy with the thought that all homosexual behaviour is sinful: motive and circumstance degrade or ennoble any act…
…An act which expresses true affection between two individuals and gives pleasure to them both, does not seem to us to be sinful by reason alone of the fact that it is homosexual. The same criteria seem to apply whether a relationship is heterosexual or homosexual.
The [Department of Defense] paid $100,000 to sponsor a strategy workshop in September featuring a session called ‘Did Jesus die for Klingons, too?’ on the theological threat to Christianity that the discovery of life on other planets might pose.
When Mormons Were Socialists →
My biggest concern with Romney running for president is more articles like this. I don’t know Romney personally, but I served my mission with people who had done business directly with him, and they respected him. From what I’ve read of his business experience, it scares me, but I don’t have all the facts.
The fact of the matter is that Mormons covenant to give of their time, talents, and resources to the church when called upon. It is true that we lived very socialist lives in the early days of the church. Why don’t we now? Because we were too damn greedy.
I, for one, welcome the Law of Consecration.
So did the early Christians, according to the Acts of the Apostles.
You tell ‘em, Jesus.
This is the bit all the fanatics conveniently forget.
