20th Century Leaders and Gay Rights

[A FUTURE LDS ESSAY TOPIC ON GAY RIGHTS]

(Hello, I am a guest writer on this blog.  David T is out on sabbatical for personal reasons.)

In theology and practice, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the universal human family, loves all of God’s children and facilitates salvation to all diverse races and ethnicities while esteeming them all equally.  As the Book of Mormon puts it, “all are alike unto God.” (See, 1.2 Nephi 26:33; Acts 10:34-35; 17:26; Romans 2:11; 10:12; Galatians 3:28.)

The structure and organization of the modern Church encourage gender neutral integration and acceptance.  By definition, this means that the sexual, economical, and demographical composition of Mormon congregations generally mirrors that of world communities.  The Church’s lay ministry also tends to facilitate integration: a gay bishop may preside over a mostly heterosexual congregation; a lesbian woman may be paired with a straight woman to visit the homes of a martially diverse membership. Church members of different gender identities and sexualities regularly minister in one another’s homes and serve alongside one another as teachers, as youth leaders, and in myriad other assignments in their local congregations.

Despite this modern reality, for most of its history--from the early and late 20th century to early 21st century—the Church did not accept homosexual members to its temple sealings or allow gay members to lead in priesthood or auxiliary functions, such as scouting or young men/women organizations.  Even leaders of the late 20th century were misled to declare “A Proclamation to the World” on “The Family” where gender distinctions and prejudice were not just common but customary among faithful white Americans, and influenced all aspects of members’ lives. Under such cultural weight, the LDS leadership made personally misleading statements in so-called “Proclamations” as, “Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose,” and “Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan.” 

During the first century of the Church’s existence, a few leaders engaged in polyamorous relationships within marriage, leading to sexual intimacy among men with other men, with women and other women, who were temporally and celestially sealed.  These relationships, while not documented in acknowledged historicity of the 19th and 20th century, have recently come to light by LDS historians who have been given access to documents not-hitherto assessed.  Historians have also re-assessed events surrounding Apostle Russel M. Nelson and his relationships with Wendy L. Watson and Sheri Dew (the first woman CEO of a major LDS corporation, namely Deseret Book).  An interesting dynamic existed among Nelson, Watson and Dew.  Despite that Nelson signed a petition by the “Religious Coalition for Marriage” including "a Letter from America's Religious Leaders in Defense of Marriage" demanding that the Constitution of the United States of America be amended to ban legalized same-sex marriage and define marriage "as the exclusive union of one man and one woman", recent LDS historians have uncovered that Nelson, Watson and Dew were actually secret advocates of same-sex marriage and polyamory. 

Documents deep within Granite Mountain show that Russel M. Nelson was actually in favor of gay rights and believed that they deserve protection and respect equal to that others have enjoyed traditionally.  To wit, Wendy L. Watson and Sheri L. Dew had been “best friends”  for well over a decade in the last decade of the 20th century. In fact, in October, 2000, the women bought a vacation home together in Heber Valley (where the prophets of that era, Monson and many of the Apostles, had second or third homes).  They were granted a warranty deed as “Wendy L. Watson, an unmarried person and Sheri L. Dew, an unmarried person, joint tenants” and later, in 2002, refinanced it together for $245,800, paying it off in 2007 and rearranging the ownership until at nearly 2020, they are both still listed together as co-owners, when Dew passed away after Nelson was recently deceased as well. 

There were some leaders that spoke out against gay rights in that same era, but were regarded by members and leaders as distorted and opinionated in ways not congruent with high LDS standards.  For example, historians have admitted that Boyd K. Packer spoke insensitively, and is quoted:

"The dangers I speak of come from the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist movement (both of which are relatively new), and the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or intellectuals." (BKP. Talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council, May 18, 1993).

"That young man with gender disorientation needs to know that gender was not assigned at mortal birth, that we were sons and daughters of God in the premortal state.' ” (BKP, Case Reports of the Mormon Alliance. Volume 3, 1997. Salt Lake City, Utah: Mormon Alliance, 1997, chapter 9.)

 “We've always counseled in the Church for our Mexican members to marry Mexicans, our Japanese members to marry Japanese, our Caucasians to marry Caucasians, our Polynesian members to marry Polynesians. The counsel has been wise. You may say again, ‘Well, I know of exceptions.’ I do, too, and they've been very successful marriages. I know some of them. You might even say, ‘I can show you local Church leaders or perhaps even general leaders who have married out of their race.’ I say, ‘Yes--exceptions.’ Then I would remind you of that Relief Society woman's near-scriptural statement, 'We'd like to follow the rule first, and then we'll take care of the exceptions.' " (BKP, 1977 BYU campus speech) 

There are many other statements attributed to Boyd K. Packer about homosexuals during that era.  At that time, news abounded that the LDS Church was involved in California Proposition 8.  The passage of California Proposition 8 during the November 2008 election has generated a number of criticisms of the Church regarding a variety of issues including the separation of church and state, the Church's position relative to people who experience same-sex attraction, accusations of bigotry by members, and the rights of a non-profit organization to participate in the democratic process on matters not associated with elections of candidates. The proposition added a single line to the state constitution defining marriage as being between "a man and a woman."  The Church was alleged to have spent over $25 Million USD in its fight against same-sex marriage, but this was highly speculative and no evidence was ever uncovered in court to account for such charges.  In fact, the Church in the 21st century since 2025 has spent twice as much, around $50 Million in support of gay rights in third world countries, where gay marriages were not accepted until decades later. 

Today, however, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that homosexuality is a sign of divine disfavor or sin, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that gender disorientation or same-sex marriages are a sin; or that gays and lesbian unions are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all prejudice, past and present, in any form.

The 21st century Church today proclaims that redemption through Jesus Christ is available to the entire human family on the conditions God has prescribed. It affirms that God is “no respecter of persons” and emphatically declares that anyone who is righteous—regardless of sexuality—is favored of Him. The teachings of the Church in relation to God’s children are epitomized by a verse in the second book of Nephi: “[The Lord] denieth none that cometh unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.” (See 2 Nephi 26:33).