proposition 8

You are currently browsing articles tagged proposition 8.

Caring for the Poor as a “New Emphasis” for the Church

10 December 2009 @ 10:26 am | 9 comments

Picking up on an earlier post, the SL Trib confirms that caring for the poor as a “new emphasis” for Church

The LDS Church is adding “to care for the poor and needy” to its longstanding “threefold mission,” which is to preach the LDS gospel, purify members’ lives and provide saving ordinances such as baptism to those who have died . . .

The new group of phrases will be described as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ “purposes,” rather than missions, and will be spelled out in the next edition of the LDS Church Handbook of Instructions , due out next year, church spokesman Scott Trotter confirmed this week.

“Caring for the poor and needy,” Trotter said, “has always been a basic tenet of the [LDS] Church.”

Exactly. But could this also be a smart move to publicly establish the Church as the unequivocal force for good it has always been?

It seems that a good percentage of the Church’s Newsroom press releases are about various welfare and charity projects the Church contributes to. And on a smaller level, stakes and wards do all kinds of charitable activities that never get mentioned.

And yet, as is the nature of news, they get scant attention. Instead, the Church only seems to merit headlines when it takes the relatively infrequent political stand. I would hazard a guess that over half of the national news mentions the Church has received this year are from last year’s Proposition 8 involvement.

The Church and its members have always had caring for the poor and the needy as a focus (Heck last night, our Young Men and Women went Christmas caroling (on a very cold Utah night) collecting coats and clothes for the poor – even before this all becomes “official” in the handbook). So it’s nice to see this important principle gain greater recognition, but it’s not new.

UPDATE: Thanks to KSL for the link too. The original post is here.

Elder Oaks on Religious Freedom and the Proposition 8 Aftermath

13 October 2009 @ 3:39 pm | 31 comments

Elder Dallin H. Oaks spoke at BYU-Idaho today on religious freedom but garnered coverage for his remarks on the lasting effects of Proposition 8.

The anti-Mormon backlash after California voters overturned gay marriage last fall is similar to the intimidation of Southern blacks during the civil rights movement, a high-ranking leader in the LDS Church says in a speech to be delivered Tuesday.

More than just commenting on Prop 8, Elder Oaks’ talk “Religious Freedom” deals with some of the concerns he has with those trying to silence religious voices in political debate and the conflict of religious freedom with “newly alleged civil rights.”

Apparently anticipating the attention this would get Elder Oaks spoke with the AP reporter before the talk.

In an interview Monday before the speech, Elder Oaks said he did not consider it provocative to compare the treatment of LDS Church members in the election’s aftermath to that of blacks in the civil rights era, and said he stands by the analogy.

“It may be offensive to some — maybe because it hadn’t occurred to them that they were putting themselves in the same category as people we deplore from that bygone era,” he said. . .

In an interview Monday, Elder Oaks said the Proposition 8 saga was one of several trends that motivated him to deliver the address, but it was “not the trigger.”

“There are civil rights involved in this — the right to speak your mind, to participate in the election,” Elder Oaks said. “But you don’t have a civil right to win an election or retaliate against those who prevail.”

Elder Oaks said he is specifically concerned about a movement toward using hate crimes laws to prosecute or threaten preachers who preach that homosexual acts are sinful.

Elder Oaks’ address also rejects any religious test for public office. He said that if “a candidate is seen to be rejected at the ballot box primarily because of religious belief or affiliation, the precious free exercise of religion is weakened at its foundation …”

In the interview Monday, Elder Oaks said he was referring in part to the 2008 presidential bid of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose LDS faith troubled some evangelicals.

The LDS Newsroom has a news release “Apostle Says Religious Freedom Is Being Threatened.”

Elder Oaks’ talk “Religious Freedom” transcript.

Very confusing. I was told it was wrong for out-of-staters to influence a state’s gay marriage initiative. Not anymore I guess.

24 September 2009 @ 11:00 pm | No comments

Time Magazine: “The Storm Over the Mormons.” Very fair overview of the LDS CHurch and look at the aftermath of Proposition 8.

But as a Mormon concern, it long predates Prop 8. For a century, the Mormon church had a rocky and sometimes bloody relationship with American culture at large; persecution by “gentiles” became key to LDS self-understanding. But thanks to their industry, optimism and civic-mindedness, many Mormons have found their place in the American fabric. Ballard says, “We’d like to be seen as mainstream–if that means being part of the national conversation about issues of morality and having our members respected as contributing members of society. But we have to hang on to what’s true, regardless of where society goes.” He adds, “We’ve never felt that we were being more understood or more appreciated, at least in my 30 years as a general authority.” Ballard helped supervise an outreach program during the heightened “Mormon Moment” of the Romney campaign as apostles fanned out to visit media editorial boards. However, he contends that the “real power” determining public perception of his faith is “when a member of the church meets his neighbor, and the neighbor sees that he has objectives to his life and is finding happiness in his field. That’s starting to happen all over” . . .

The Church has not decided on its future role in the gay-marriage debate. The heat surrounding Prop 8 may die down by next year. “Talking about what may or may not happen in 2010 would be speculation, and I wouldn’t want to do that,” says Apostle Quentin Cook. The LDS abstained from same-sex-marriage battles in Iowa and New England. But avoiding a California rematch may be tougher. Notre Dame’s Campbell says, “If it appeared that the church sat out next time because it was criticized this time, there might be a credibility question.” But given a national trend toward supporting gay marriage, he asks, “Does the church want the public to identify it primarily as a political body opposing an issue that comes back again and again?”

11 June 2009 @ 4:02 pm | 2 comments

Prop 8 Survives As Do Preexisting Gay Marriages

26 May 2009 @ 11:18 am | 11 comments

The California Supreme Court ’s decision on Proposition 8 is out. As expected by most court observers, the court upheld the measure and ruled that it does not invalidate already performed same-sex marriages.

In summary, we conclude that Proposition 8 constitutes a permissible constitutional amendment (rather than an impermissible constitutional revision), does not violate the separation of powers doctrine, and is not invalid under the “inalienable rights” theory proffered by the Attorney General. We further conclude that Proposition 8 does not apply retroactively and therefore that the marriages of same-sex couples performed prior to the effective date of Proposition 8 remain valid.

Having determined that none of the constitutional challenges to the adoption of Proposition 8 have merit, we observe that if there is to be a change to the state constitutional rule embodied in that measure, it must “find its expression at the ballot box.”

In other words, the same Court that tried to find a new right to same-sex marriage in the state’s consitituion last year could do so much to redefine marriage and now invites a rematch at the ballot box until the desired result is reached.

Regarding the surviving same-sex marriages: I don’t what could have been an equitable decision. I feel for the couples in that situation and don’t blame them for availing themselves of the law as it was created by the courts last year. But their tenuous and vulnerable situation was the result of a court that refused to stay its own decision, knowing full well that the issue was going to be decided at the ballot box later that year.

The Court created the dilemma of what to do with the already preformed 18,000 same-sex marriages at the time Prop 8 was passed. The Court was not going to admit its mistake by voiding those ceremonies. Plus, as California is surely going to face another proposition to recognize SSM, those 18,000 couples will serve as a great campaign tool for the upcoming campaigns.

UPDATE: The Church offers a response:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes the deeply held feelings on both sides, but strongly affirms its belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The bedrock institution of marriage between a man and a woman has profound implications for our society. These implications range from what our children are taught in schools to individual and collective freedom of religious expression and practice.

Accordingly, the Church stands firmly for what it believes is right for the health and well-being of society as a whole. In doing so, it once again affirms that all of us are children of God, and all deserve to be treated with respect. The Church believes that serious discussion of these issues is not helped when extreme elements on both sides of the debate demonize the other.

Prop 8 ruling to come on Tuesday.

The California Supreme Court announced today that it will rule Tuesday on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the November ballot measure that resurrected a ban on same-sex marriage.

The ruling, which will be posted at 10 a.m., will also determine whether an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages will continue to be recognized by the state.

22 May 2009 @ 11:28 am | No comments

National Review prints Orson Scott Card on Big Love: Big Deal:

Most Mormons are seeing the Big Love temple episode in the context of the recent outpouring of hatred and bile from those who most vehemently opposed Proposition 8. Mormons have been targeted for business boycotts; some have lost their jobs because they contributed to the campaign to defend marriage.

The result is that few of us have any desire to act as the worst of our opponents have acted. After someone has boycotted a friend’s business, it makes it a bit harder for you to want to call for a boycott.

By and large, while we’d prefer that everybody handle differences of opinion peacefully, we’d rather be persecuted than be the persecutors. The few times in our history when we have departed from that principle, the results have shamed us for generations. Tolerance works better.

What Mormons keep foremost in mind is this: We’re a worldwide church. We might be going through a rough patch in America right now, as we butt heads with the oppressive New Puritans of the American Left, but that has nothing to do with how the Mormon Church is growing in Mexico, Brazil, Nigeria, or Taiwan.

Big Love is just an entertainment; nothing they do will diminish the sacredness of what goes on inside our temples . . .

The more they attack us, the more people they bring to us as allies and, occasionally, as converts to our faith. So rave on, brothers and sisters!

13 March 2009 @ 10:04 am | 4 comments

Rumors of General Conference Protests Debunked

3 March 2009 @ 1:14 pm | 2 comments

Apparently a bogus email has been circulating, claiming that the mother of all General Conference protests was coming next month.

An inflammatory e-mail is circulating around the country, saying Salt Lake City police officers are preparing for up to 200,000 protesters during the LDS General Conference in April, and it’s causing concern in both the Latter-day Saint and gay communities.

The e-mail begins with reference to a good friend whose dad, who supposedly works for the Salt Lake City Police Department, says police are putting in extra hours doing riot training.

“The training they are possibly referring to is this routine training that we do every year on crowd control techniques and protest,” said Detective Dennis McGowan, spokesman for the Salt Lake City Police Department.

McGowan added, “You know, thanks for the opportunity, though, to get this out to everyone that, as far as our concern at this point in time, these are rumors and everyone can stand down.”

Still, the article says that 2,000 protestors were at the October conference, which was before the Proposition 8 victory when most activists decided to target the Church. It’s wise not to be alarmist but it wouldn’t be too surprising to see angry gay marriage activists joining arms with angry Evangelicals to form an especially robust protest next month.

A look at the attorneys arguing Prop 8 this Thursday.

[Kenneth] Starr, dean of Pepperdine University School of Law, is best known for leading the inquiry into President Bill Clinton’s affair with a White House intern.

Since then, the former federal judge and U.S. solicitor general has dedicated himself to conservative causes, including writing briefs for the Mormon church in a previous gay marriage case in California.

Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights in San Francisco, is a transsexual who spent his first 35 years as a female. He was a lead counsel in the state Supreme Court case decided last May that allowed same-sex couples to marry, a ruling that was reversed in November when voters approved Proposition 8.

Starr and Minter will square off Thursday in the most closely watched California Supreme Court hearing in a generation. They’re set to deliver oral arguments in three suits in which supporters of gay marriage contend that Proposition 8, which limits marriage to a man and a woman, is unconstitutional.

2 March 2009 @ 3:45 pm | No comments

LDS Church Statement on Sen. Chris Buttars:

From the outset, the Church’s position has always been to engage in civil and respectful dialogue on this issue. Senator Buttars does not speak for the Church.

20 February 2009 @ 2:38 pm | 2 comments

The EightMaps.com creator doesn’t want to be found.

The map application has become an icon for the extremes to which political transparency can be taken — but whoever made it prefers to remain completely anonymous. The application is registered anonymously through GoDaddy and offers no contact information.

11 February 2009 @ 3:25 pm | 3 comments

Why Stick to the Issues When You Can Stick It to Your Opponents?

10 February 2009 @ 12:39 pm | 172 comments

Anti-Mormon Prop 8 protestEver since Prop 8 opponents woke up on November 5 and realized they had lost, much commentary has focused on the “unfairness” of the Mormon Church’s involvement. Even though activists are still seeking to enforce gay marriage through the courts, they don’t appear to want to talk about it. Instead, the post-election discussion has suggested that the Mormon Church went “too far.”

Much speculation has been made that Mormons individually donated perhaps half of the pro-Prop 8 funding.   Despite misleading reporting, as Mormon Inquiry points out, the LDS Church itself donated “less than one half of one percent of the total funds” to support Prop 8.  And that was only considering the non-monetary, in-kind support to the ProtectMarriage.com coalition.  Despite false accusations and faulty reporting, the LDS Church support has been transparent and above the board.

If donations and transparency must be considered, then include the following:

So why are Mormons facing the brunt of criticism?  Is it unfair that the church was too successful in encouraging and organizing those Mormons who supported Prop 8?  Are they just a convenient scapegoat?  Despite having more money, the “No on 8″ crowd is content to direct its rage on others rather than ask themselves what they did wrong.

Aside from death threats, most of the behavior appears to be legal but is still downright creepy.  I don’t think criticism of Mormons or the LDS Church should be considered a hate crime and I do believe campaign donations should be more transparent than not.  But it’s difficult to comprehend that there wouldn’t be more outrage if gay marriage activists were being listed on web sites or black-listed.  While there has been some attention paid to this harassment it would be nice to see some investigations into who is behind it and ask them to justify these tactics.

Who knows how the courts will rule on the validity of Prop 8.  But is there any doubt that if and when the issue returns to the ballot box (for the the third time), that gay marriage supporters are now laying the foundation to discourage anyone who considers opposing them again?  

Traditional marriage may have won for now but trends suggest that may not be the case for long.   Rather than demonizing those who disagree with them, gay marriage supporters should show some patience and continue the debate.  As they have made quite clear, it’s not going away.

For the record. Tom Hanks apologizes:

Last week, I labeled members of the Mormon church who supported California’s Proposition 8 as “un-American.” I believe Proposition 8 is counter to the promise of our Constitution; it is codified discrimination. But everyone has a right to vote their conscience – nothing could be more American. To say members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who contributed to Proposition 8 are “un-American” creates more division when the time calls for respectful disagreement. No one should use “un- American” lightly or in haste. I did. I should not have.

Sincerely,
Tom Hanks.

23 January 2009 @ 2:11 pm | 3 comments

I guess our generation’s Jimmy Stewart (ha!) won’t be doing a remake of Mr. Krueger’s Christmas:  ”Tom Hanks Says Mormon Supporters of Proposition 8 ‘Un-American’.”  

Hanks also happens to produce “Big Love” which returns this Sunday.  Nothing like some well-planned controversial statements to get some cheap publicity.

UPDATE:  ”Also un-American by this definition? Americans.”

[via BCC making a funny]

16 January 2009 @ 11:17 am | No comments

Kudos to GayPatriot for supporting the Coyote.

3 January 2009 @ 10:17 pm | No comments

The Ad Slinging Continues

10 December 2008 @ 3:23 pm | 8 comments

In response to the NY Times ad placed last week defending the LDS Church and others for the Prop 8 backlash, a NY group “Truth Wins Out” is placing an ad in tomorrow’s Salt Lake Tribune.

Rather than refuting the claims of the NY Times ad, the SL Trib ad,  “Lies in the Name of the Lord,” seeks to make out some of the signers of the ad into “some of the most notorious Mormon bashers in America.”  But the ad merely shows that they have theological differences with the Mormon Church.  Not quite Mormon bashing.  It turns out that the Mormon Church has theological differences with the Becket ad signers too.

While Chuck Colson, William Donohue and others may not believe what the Mormon Church teaches, they at least agree that Mormons and other religious people have the right to express themselves, politically and religiously, without threat of intimidation or fear of losing one’s job.

NY Times Ad Defends Mormons

5 December 2008 @ 3:09 pm | 21 comments

Here’s one thing the internet still can’t provide: advocacy ads printed in the NY Times.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has placed a full-page ad in the New York Times today assembling various religious leaders to denounce the recent attacks on the Mormon Church in the wake of Proposition 8. You can see the ad at its companion site NoMobVeto.org.

The ad begins:

We’re a disagreeable lot. We differ about a great many important things. Most, but not all of us, are religious believers. We likewise differ on important moral and legal questions, including the wisdom and justice of California’s Proposition 8, banning same-sex marriage.

Nevertheless we’re united in this: The violence and intimidation being directed against the LDS or “Mormon” church, or other religious organizations – and even against individual believers – simply because they supported Proposition 8 is an outrage that must stop.

This is the latest of efforts to rally behind the Church’s as it has faced backlash in its support for Propostion 8 (also, see AboveTheHate.com and its open letter to President Monson). There has been speculation that the Church’s involvement with Prop has been a “fiasco.” But such handwringing seems to be from the perspective of those who think a boycott of Sundance would hurt Mormons.

Instead, the Prop 8 aftermath appears to have won the Mormon Church new appreciation among social conservatives. Whether that is momentary or incremental remains to be seen. I don’t think that’s necessarily a gain for the Mormon Church, but it is among those religious conservatives who were too religiously blinded to realize the Church should be a natural ally in many causes.

Did Church critics really want to push the Mormon Church closer to the religious right?

UPDATE: The LDS Church expressed appreciation for the ad:

Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles said: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints expresses its gratitude to the signatories of the full-page advertisement that appeared today in the New York Times. This was a thoughtful and generous gesture at a time when the right of free expression of people of faith has come under attack. We join with those of all religious faiths and political persuasions who have called for reasoned and civil discourse on matters that affect our nation.”

Mormon Church Responds to Proposition 8 Passage

5 November 2008 @ 12:46 pm | 24 comments

Mormon Church Responds to the passage of Proposition 8.  It covers defending the integrity of marriage, church involvement in politics, bigotry on both sides, and members who opposed the Church’s position.

We hope that now and in the future all parties involved in this issue will be well informed and act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility toward those with a different position.   No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information.

It is important to understand that this issue for the Church has always been about the sacred and divine institution of marriage — a union between a man and a woman.

Allegations of bigotry or persecution made against the Church were and are simply wrong.  The Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility toward gays and lesbians.  Even more, the Church does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.

Some, however, have mistakenly asserted that churches should not ever be involved in politics when moral issues are involved.  In fact, churches and religious organizations are well within their constitutional rights to speak out and be engaged in the many moral and ethical problems facing society.  While the Church does not endorse candidates or platforms, it does reserve the right to speak out on important issues.

Before it accepted the invitation to join broad-based coalitions for the amendments, the Church knew that some of its members would choose not to support its position.   Voting choices by Latter-day Saints, like all other people, are influenced by their own unique experiences and circumstances.  As we move forward from the election, Church members need to be understanding and accepting of each other and work together for a better society.

As politically cliched as it sounds, there will have to be a lot of healing after this.  Although Prop 8 passed, there’s not a lot to celebrate.  I feel like the Church and supporters of traditional marriage were forced to enter into a tough fight and everybody got badly bruised.

How Barack Obama inadevertently helped Prop. 8. Will African-Americans share in the blame with Mormons?

5 November 2008 @ 11:46 am | 1 comment

In short, we preach unity among the community of Saints and tolerance toward the personal differences that are inevitable in the beliefs and conduct of a diverse population. Tolerance obviously requires a non-contentious manner of relating toward one another’s differences. But tolerance does not require abandoning one’s standards or one’s opinions on political or public policy choices. Tolerance is a way of reacting to diversity, not a command to insulate it from examination.

Strong calls for diversity in the public sector sometimes have the effect of pressuring those holding majority opinions to abandon fundamental values to accommodate the diverse positions of those in the minority. Usually this does not substitute a minority value for a majority one. Rather, it seeks to achieve “diversity” by abandoning the official value position altogether, so that no one’s value will be contradicted by an official or semiofficial position. The result of this abandonment is not a diversity of values but an official anarchy of values. I believe this is an example of BYU visiting professor Louis Pojman’s observation in a recent Universe Viewpoint (October 13, 1998, p. 4) that diversity can be used “as a euphemism for moral relativism.”

Elder Dallin H. Oaks, “Weightier Matters,” BYU Speeches, 9 February 1999 [emphasis added]

3 November 2008 @ 10:17 pm | 1 comment

“The Wrong Way to Win Gay Marriage Rights”

So, in these desperate final weeks, the new campaign team for No on 8 has adopted a tough, closing message that may yet salvage victory for same-sex marriage. The message? The people behind the ban are Mormons . . .

This Mormon support is so vast that it’s a political vulnerability for the Yes on Prop 8 campaign. In polls, Americans register a low opinion of the Mormon religion (In a 2007 CBS News survey, the religion had a 25 percent favorable rating; the only faith less popular was Islam) The church’s history on marriage — it ended polygamy in 1890 — is a complicated one. So Mormons are a tempting target. But by raising the issue of Mormon support for the ban, supporters of same-sex marriage, who have spent decades battling religious prejudice, are now in the awkward position of profiting from religious prejudice.

There is rough justice in that. Perhaps too rough. It’s unlikely that the progressive groups would ever single out their political opponents’ religion if the religion in question was Judaism or Catholicism . . .

In its final days, the campaign in California feels less like a debate over the nature of marriage and more like a low-down discussion of which is creepier: gay sex or Mormons?

3 November 2008 @ 10:04 pm | 1 comment

Anti-Prop 8 Ad Directly Attacks Mormon Church and its Missionaries

3 November 2008 @ 8:30 pm | 38 comments

Wow. This isn’t exactly subtle.



KUTV summarizes this full-on attack ad smearing the LDS Church:

In the commercial they knock on the door, say they are from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and tell a lesbian couple “we are here to take away your rights.”

They enter the home take the women’s rings, ransack the house looking for their marriage license, find it, and then tear it up.

At the end, the missionaries was away saying, “that was too easy, yeah, what should we ban next?”

So who has the campaign of hate? Mormon missionaries are now portrayed as fascist stormtroopers out to take away people’s rights? What kind of treatment is in store for missionaries going door to door or proselytizing in the streets?

Last week several commenters suggested that much of the Pro-Prop 8 arguments were attacks on the judges. Somehow using the same arguments as the dissenting justices was demonizing the court and judicial system. I would like to ask those commenters how does this ad compare? Not being in California, I don’t know but I fear for the damage this will to do the Church in California.

This isn’t your quickie dime-a-dozen internet ad. It’s professionally done and KUTV reports it will be airing tomorrow in California as well as on CNN and MSNBC.

I guess this is what was meant when a San Francisco city attorney said that the Prop 8 debate was a “blood feud” with the Mormon Church.

UPDATE: The Church’s response:

“The Church has joined a broad-based coalition in defense of traditional marriage. While we feel this is important to all of society, we have always emphasized that respect be given to those who feel differently on this issue. It is unfortunate that some who oppose this proposition have not given the Church this same courtesy.”

[via Article VI]

Protestors at the Oakland Temple

27 October 2008 @ 6:32 am | 36 comments

Some emails circulated last week reporting ugly incidents at the Oakland Temple. But I haven’t seen any corroboration of the incident(s).

Sunday morning, however, there was a protest at the Oakland California LDS temple. From the news account, it sounds like it was peaceful.

About 50 protesters came to the Mormon Temple in Oakland this morning to speak out against the religious group’s support for an anti-gay marriage ballot measure.

“I can’t believe that a religious group that preaches truth and love is asking their members to campaign and donate to take away my civil rights,” said Jill Shearer, 40, of Oakland. Shearer grew up in San Ramon and was raised Mormon. When she came out as a lesbian, she said her family still kept her close . . .

“They have their right to make their cause known, just like the Yes on 8 folks do,” said Rand King, 60, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who is a member of the Protect Marriage Coalition. “They obviously want to portray us as haters of them. We’re not at all. We just want to protect traditional marriage.”

Fortunately, as the temple was closed, patrons didn’t have to face the protestors but I wonder how the Visitor Center handled the situation.

You can see more photos of the protest at this Flickr stream. Of note are the Osama would vote for Prop 8 sign and the “Latter-day Bigots” sign.