Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m Horrified

FamilySearch Hates Gay People

I tried to enter a same-sex legal marriage into family search today and was unable to. The fact that this is a family tree making site and you obviously have no problem with entering adopted family members or step family members means that you don't actually have anything to do with biological parentage, therefor your only motive could be oppression, hate, and downright disgusting religious discrimination. You should stop being homophobic and hateful to an entire group of people and open up your services to minorities.
3 people like
this idea
+1
This topic is no longer open for comments or replies.
  • 3
    Welcome to the community support forum for FamilySearch. FamilySearch personnel read every discussion thread and may or may not respond as their time permits. We patrons, having various levels of knowledge and experience do our best to help each other with concerns, issues. and/or questions.

    Same gender marriage is in the works. This was announced at least six months ago, but there is a major rework of the site in process, so many desired features (yours is only one of many) are not going to appear immediately.

    Be aware that FamilySearch is not geared toward full support of living persons. And since legalized same-gender marriage likely does not involve deceased persons, it may be a bit before the ability to enter same-gender couples becomes available.

    The couple relationship area is one of the weakest in the system and many of us want more than what is currently offered.

    Making a statement like "Hates" whatever, is a major reaction to what amounts to a minor issue that isn't currently applicable.

    If you want to track same gender relationships, then find a family tree management program that allows you to do that. Currently, I do not know of any, but then, I'm only familiar with a couple of them.

    I suspect that same gender relationships will become widely available for all sites that support trees.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 4
    As Tom said, same-sex marriage is a modern phenomenon, and online trees are not the place for keeping track of living people. FamilySearch is nevertheless working on adding the possibility.

    In the meantime, there is a page on Wikipedia comparing the features of nearly two dozen offline family tree programs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...

    Quite a few of them are indicated as supporting same-sex marriage, including some of the free ones.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • I’m offended by invectives.
    5
    FamilySearch is an entity, not a human person.

    Entities have no emotion and therefore no "hate." FamilySearch is a service provided to willing participants.

    If you have trouble determining what demonstrating hate actually IS, here are some examples:
    >> your only motive could be oppression
    >> stop being homophobic
    >> hateful to an entire group of people
    and:
    >> downright disgusting religious discrimination
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Ron Tanner (FamilySearch.org Product Manager) April 17, 2018 18:08
    We have several older systems that need to be updated to support same sex relationships. Our intentions are to do so and we are currently re-writing these systems. We hope to complete these updates early next year and will then introduce this capability. We appreciate your patience as we fix these issues. Our goal is to allow people to accurately document their genealogy and have it preserved for the future.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Hi Emma,

    Our goal to capture, store, and provide records and an accurate genealogy that represents past, present, and future families of the world.

    To support this goal, same-sex relationships, including same-sex parents and same-sex couples, will be provided in FamilySearch Family Tree.

    Several systems that surround Family Tree, such as tree and record searching, must be significantly redesigned to support same-sex relationships before Family Tree can release this capability. We expect to finish this work by 2019.

    Following this work, the FamilySearch Family Tree application can then allow same-sex information to be recorded. We appreciate your patience and desire to preserve the world’s genealogy in Family Tree.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I'm going out on a limb here, but unless Emma responds, I get the feeling that this is a drive-by complaint, just to draw attention to what Robert is talking about.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • I’m Disgusted
    2
    First Robert legally in the United States, companies are not considered entities, they are considered people. Yes, they are controlled by many minds, but those minds make up the collective morality of the company. Therefor, when a company is specifically discriminating against a marginalized group, the company is showing their affiliations and can hate something. Groups of multitudes can hate. There is literally an entire term for groups that make hate and discrimination a part of their specific service offerings. Otherwise, you understand what I mean and you are being willfully obtuse because you think I am being silly or dramatic and thus feel the inexplicable need to punish me for being honest.

    2. Tom and Juli, no same-sex relationships are NOT a modern phenomenon. Gay marriage may be fairly new - as of literally the start of my freshman year of college where I live - I’m graduating from that school today - and even earlier in other places, but gay relationships, permanent couplings, civili unions, and even same-sex child-rearing is not new and has been around and has been to some extent well documented throughout history, especially recent history. My teacher has been with her wife since the 60s and they raised a daughter together, she’s my age now, but because of these rules, she would only be able to enter her biological mother with no relationship to her adoptive mother in a family tree on your website, while another friend of mine could very well enter his step mother and biological father’s information, labeling them as divorced even. And yet the site chose to delibritly make this unavailable and you can tell by the war they make all three genders viewable when filling out a spouce’s information. Yet when you hover over the same-sex or other a red circle with a bar through it appears. This is self acknowledgement, they could have just allowed those buttons to function in the way they do for everything else, but they didn’t.
    This is more than discrimination, it’s LGBT relationship erasure and it was a specific choice to discriminate in this way, i.e. by withholding goods and services from LGBT couples or families with known LGBT family members. Not all gay people are alive right now, we’ve been cohabitating, loving, and growing families throughout all of human history, (My expertise lie in an ancient history, so I’ve actually read records of such relationships and life long love cohabitations from Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. So no, gay people have ALWAYS been here, cohabitating and loving and they are definitely older parts of family trees.
    Finally, courts have ruled that withholding of a service by a service provider based on sexuality is illegal. You admit you don’t know of any non-gay-discriminatory programs for this service online, that’s a problem. The best free online family trea service and document search service demands straight relationships even though it doesn’t demand biological parents only be entered. If you can’t see how frustrating and problamatic that is then maybe a simile would help you understand: this is like you wanting to go to the best commercial drug store and yet Walgreens and CVS don’t allow straight people to actually buy anything. Except 10 times worse, because entire parts of families are being erased and FamilyTree is perpetuating gay erasure.
    3. Linsey, thank you for you response, though it concerns me that it has taken until 2018 to being to fix this, I’m glad to know it is being felt with, I am grateful for the respectful and validating comment. I can’t wait to see this major gaphe fixed.
    4. Tom, I have a life, unlike some, and what would be the problem with me calling attention to it, that is what this forum is for, drawing attention to problems.
    Discrimination is hate in action. The is discrimination minorities for being born minorities. It’s very important to call it out and get it fixed ASAP.
    • view 3 more comments
    • I think we're talking about two different definitions here. Discrimination as defined by Merriam-Webster in the sense I'm talking about is thus:
      a : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
      I believe based on what you said you're using this one as the one that isn't bad (correct me if I'm wrong):
      b : the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually

      My argument is there is no prejudice in not having a process to define a relationship type if the process hasn't been made yet. It IS prejudice if it hasn't been made yet and there is a discriminatory flat out refusal to put forth the effort one.

      I think we can chalk this misunderstanding up to the failings of the English Language.
    • Is prejudice automatically wrong? No. It is my preconceived opinion and prejudice that men generally run faster than women, jump higher than women and throw further than women. Am I correct? Yes.

      World record 100 m for men 9.58 seconds. World record 100 m for women 10.49 seconds. World record marathon for men 2:02:57. World record marathon for women 2:15:25. World record high jump for men 2.45 m. World record high jump for women 2.09 m. World record javelin throw for men 98.48 m. World record javelin throw for women 72.28 m. It should also be noted that the women's javelin is 0.75 times the mass of the men's javelin. It is also the case that the average man is physically stronger than the average woman.

      Most prejudice is bad and wrong, but not all of it is.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m extremely cautious
    While this is a problem for some individuals, this is most likely on the back-burner as the FS representatives said. FamilySearch has some major problems that need fixing (LDS Temple system, GEDCOMs, etc) and those will take priority over this. That 2019 estimate to me feels rather generous.

    In my opinion, This is a very emotionally charged discussion and we should probably get a moderator in here before this explodes into a pseudo-flame war.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 4
    Same gender relationship are common throughout history, however, records of those relationships are seldom in existence, even though traditions, stories, and other accounts record such. They amount to unsourced documents, which, by definition, are consider mythology within the genealogical community (NGS -- not the LDS or FamilySearch).

    The only time that such a relationship could be provided with a primary or secondary source or by the preponderance of evidence, is if children were involved -- and until same gender relationship were recognized as legal entities, no such adoptions could take place.

    Now to an apology -- After all that time had passed and no response, I started to wonder if this wasn't another case of someone posing as a real person to simply "cause a ruckus". My apology, but I wondered if this was indeed something a person with nefarious plans did.

    The same issue has been raised previously and we were told that a means was planned. As the two FS representatives explained, there are internal programming issues that have to be dealt with. We have been told by Ron Tanner that a major push is underway to replace old, outdated, and insufficient code with code that uses new technology. This will provide a much-needed fix to many areas of the site, including being able to correct mistakes in the indices, and hopefully add such items like marriage licenses to the couple relationship area.

    Your frustration is noted, but one that many of us feel in certain areas of FamilySearch. No discrimination is intended and there is no demand that we do not enter as events, marriage licenses. I could have easily stated that FamilySearch hates marriage licenses because I cannot enter them as an event. Isn't that what you are saying with regard to same gender relationships?

    You may have noticed that only four types of events can be entered. So it isn't something that is a planned form of discrimination, but simply part of a relatively new system that badly needs new code and expanding.

    FamilySearch is not a service provider that one pays for; it is a free site to those who agree to its terms and conditions governing use. As a free site, patrons have to accept what the limited resources can provide. The site is incredibly complex and changes are being made as quickly as possible, so much so that any published documentation is out of date by the time it is published.

    Patience is a virtue that many of us, unhappy as we can be, have to practice without feelings of discrimination (and believe me, America has a history of discrimination, even today and it shows up in places like politics. FamilySearch is a world-wide entity (not a person, despite your definition). It adheres to laws regarding privacy and the legal nature of same-gender relationships are new, despite such relationships going back into the 1950s when I was in high school. We kids knew of one same-gender couple who taught in our school and it did not bother us. No one made jokes of it or a big deal of the relationship.

    After the civil war, the south had to adjust, but over time, it became known as the Jim Crow South, where discrimination reigned supreme until some very brave people took action. There are still major issue surrounding sexual preferences, but this is not one of them. It is a matter of getting the old code replaced and providing an ability to do more than record just four types of couple relationship events.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • Ron Tanner (FamilySearch.org Product Manager) April 19, 2018 18:39
    The original issue has been answered and resolved, therefore this conversation is closed.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated