It would seem that the right to marry would fall under the right to the pursuit of happiness, and may be part of the right to religious freedom for some. But, like all of these rights, there are certain laws put in place to help protect individuals and like-wise our communities and families.

For example, people are free to drink alcoholic drinks, but the law limits the age in which someone can drink, and also it limits people from driving while under the influence of alcohol. I think most would agree that these laws are there to protect individuals and like-wise our families and communities.

In marriage, there are similar limitations. For example, there are laws that prevent people from marrying there brother or sister, or even 1st cousins in some places. There is evidence that having children in these types of relationships can cause biological disorders. Also there are laws limiting the marriage of young children, meaning they have to have reached a certain age. Again these laws are set for our protection.

I and many others believe that same sex marriage is destructive to families and therefore communities, and falls under the same laws limiting marriage as the one listed above. The right to marry is not being taken away, it is just given boundaries for our own sake. Just like someone may be upset that they are not free to take harmful drugs, doing so would in the end bring destruction and misery upon themselves and possibly others. Doing that which is contrary to the laws of God, will never bring happiness.

Some may argue that they don’t believe homosexuality is contrary to God’s laws, but some things are true whether you believe them or not.

I don’t know you really are, but I know that I am not Benjamin.

While Benjamin’s comments may have been a little out there, people can get a little cranky when their rights are taken away–as happened to gays and lesbians in California and Maine in the past year.

With all due respect, you are lamenting religious freedom being “under fire” after the Mormon and Catholic Churches (among others) spearheaded the movement to take away marriage equality in California.

It is unclear to me what rights you have lost or how the right to practice your religion has been impacted. Mormons, Catholics and other religious groups still have the right to fully practice their religion in California, Maine and the other 48 states of the United States. On the other hand, because of the actions of supporters of Proposition 8 (in California) and Question 1 (in Maine), gays and lesbians have lost a real, tangible right — the right to marry. There is simply no comparison.

Worth a read.

The LDS Church membership and leadership used to be much more politically diverse than it is today. I’m finding that today’s Mormons (especially several of the leaders like Elder Oaks) are beginning to look and act more like a religious version of the G.O.P. Utah is overwhelmingly Republican. Even though the Republican Party is dying Utah’s die hards who are hanging on making extreme statements like religious freedom is at risk, etc.

As for the Civil Rights issue in the LDS Church you need to look at the history books. I know that the the Church has changed the policy regarding blacks and the priesthood. It was a policy that never was established through common consent. It was not ever included in any of the LDS scriptures and yet it was treated as Gospel for over 100 years. Joseph Smith never taught that kind of dogma in all of his life. Joseph Smith was a true visionary and had an uncanny ability to transcend many of the bias’s and the typical bigotry of his time. His incredibly progressive plan to purchase the slaves from slave owners through the sale of public lands in order to end slavery gradually could have been revolutionary and could have averted the Civil War. His ordination of Elder Elijah Abel who is a black man is evidence as to his lack of prejudice on this issue. Also Elder Walker Lewis is another black African American man who received the prior to Joseph’s murder. His son Enoch married a white LDS woman named Mary Webster and there is evidence that Brigham Young began the priesthood ban partly as a response to this interracial marriage. Brigham Young even records in his minutes that if black Enoch and his white LDS wife “far away from the Gentiles they wod. [would] all be killed – when they mingle seed it is death to all.” (Quorum of the Twelve Minutes, December 3, 1847, pp. 6–7, LDS Archives.)

Unfortunately Brigham Young gave into the bigotry that permeated the majority of American thought at the time and stopped the practice of giving black men the priesthood.

He even allowed blacks to be used as human tithing as evidenced by Mr. Green Flake a black African American man who was a slave in the Salt Lake Valley his entire life. Too many Mormons want to erase this part of the history and pretend it never happened. The Church needs to take responsibility for these things and not make excuses for them. Just simply say that Brigham Young was wrong in teaching this kind of doctrine, that it was not inspired and that he had limited understanding and knowledge at the time. The Book of Mormon was right on in the statement “black, white, bond and free all are alike unto God.” I still hear and read the b.s. remarks especially from returned missionaries and others that the priesthood ban was inspired during those times. The excuses are brought out and the pontification continues. There is and never was any excuse for this policy banning black men from the LDS priesthood simply because of his race.

Brigham Young, though an amazing and wonderful man was subject to prejudice and bigotry of his time. Even he did not escape it. Prophets are not gods.

“The sins of the Mormon Church vis-a-vis civil rights discrimination are minuscule compared to 80% of the rest of America.” Where do you get your stats? Since the vast majority of Americans are not LDS that seems kind of ridiculous when you look at it historically. America organically transcended much of this racism through the process of time. A Christian Church should never ever include racism as part of its doctrine. That is just not in keeping with the Gospel of Christ and never was. The Book of Mormon even emphatically states this in very clear terms as all are alike unto God.

Your comparison of all the groups that you raised is simply wrong because these groups have not experienced civil rights issues like African Americans did in the 1960s and before in the South. Clearly, as a white Protestant, I would never dream of making the comparison that Elder Oak made because–based upon my ethnicity and religious background–my experiences have clearly not been as severe as African Americans

However, I would not be barred from making the comparison because some white Protestants may have been slave traders or owners. First, slavery ended in the United States in 1865–unlike the Mormon Church’s discrimination against African Americans which ended in 1978–and the ancestors of most white Protestants did not owe or trade slaves. My ancestors (like many other Americans) were from the north, did not owe or trade slaves (they were farmers through the time slavery ended) and they actually fought on the side of the North during the Civil War to end slavery.