#5

Jared wrote again

I didn't even read all of your e-mail before I am sending you this one...I don't think anyone (especially not me) is saying it is okay (so don't put words in my mouth or additional meanings in my e-mails--read my e-mail did I say that), but people cannot and will not be penalized for something by the church or BYU for something they haven't done or don't do. You intellectualize (is that a word?) things too much timm. I said, maybe it does have eternal implications, but no one is going to be punished fo resisting. Yes there is ultimate good in people because we are the sons and daughters of God; but are some people more inclined to steal than others, are some people more inclined to lie than others, are some people more incline to have homosexual tendencies than others? the material version (the actual physical action) of all those tendencies are all commandments (thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt not commit adultery). I'm sure that jesus doesn't want us to think about stealing or lying either (just because he only said we shouldn't lust or hate doesn't mean that those are the only things that we have to keep from our thoughts and feelings). None of it is good to do or think about, but how can you punish or condemn people for what they resist. I have a horrible mouth, I'd like to quit swearing, so when I quit and don't swear for a month but have wanted to about 1,000 times should I be ashamed--hopefully that lessens over time, but frick dude if someone is striving to overcome something I don't think the church or byu or God is going to send them to hell for it. Pay attention to how the new rule or whatever with the honor code reads "being homosexual is not against the honor code, but acting on it is" or whatever--all it says is what is against the honor code (that's not the church's acceptance of homosexuality) it doesn't say homosexuality is fine as long as you don't act on it, all it is saying is that it is not a punishable offense to be homo and not act on it.i'm sure the rest of your e-mail is interesting and I'm going to read it now, but i thought if you wanted to argue about this then you might as well argue my point not something that you fabricated in your mind to make your side of the argument better....

after having read all of that...same feelings. and if we want to talk about typical (like I did the typical mormon thing (which I don't particularly like doing)), then timm stop being the typical intellectual that adds and "finds" meanings where they don't exist or are not intended.I agree that what is in your heart is most important! BUT FEELINGS or INCLINATIONS or TENDENCIES ARE NOT PUNISHABLE IN THIS WORLD BY THE CHURCH OR BYU!!! That's why I said "Is there punishment for people that want to have pre-marital sex--ETERNALLY MAYBE YES because Jesus taught not to lust (find some meaning in that phrase timm, of course I'm refering to what's in the heart (again you see and don't see what you want to because you're so anxious to find issue and aruge)--but here in this world? No." Eternal implications, but not punishable according to the "honor code".I argue it so vehemenently because I feel strongly about it and want to aruge my point vs. yours, not something that looks a little like my point vs. yours.interesting...