same-gender marriage

You are currently browsing articles tagged same-gender marriage.

Redefining Parenthood

New U.S. Census findings on the state of two-parent black families.

The good news:

The number of black children being raised by two parents appears to be edging higher than at any time in a generation, at nearly 40 percent, according to newly released census data.

The bad news:

The Census Bureau attributed an indeterminate amount of the increase to revised definitions adopted in 2007, which identify as parents any man and woman living together, whether or not they are married or the child’s biological parents.

A great effort was made to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. It seems like a lot of that will go to waste if the government is allowed to quietly redefine what a parent is, regardless of relation or responsibility to children.

[via Best of the Web Today]


The Ad Slinging Continues

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

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 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.


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

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

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.


I was unaware how crazy it has been in California:

I am not aware of attacks against those who oppose Prop 8 and hope there haven’t been any. But it’s ironic that those who claim Proposition 8 is all about hate seem to have plenty to share.

That said, I hope people don’t use this an an excuse to target gays and lesbians or to retaliate in any way. Too often in politics, a beleagured party hypes up its own martyrdom and some even fake attacks on its own side to provoke more outrage and sympathy (I’m not suggesting that’s the case here).

Regardless of the very troubling actions by an ugly few, it’s important to stick to facts and keep doing what is right.

As frustrating and alarming as these attacks can be, reading Elder Robert D. Hales’ conference talk, “Christian Courage: The Price of Discipleship” adds some valuable perspective.

Some people mistakenly think responses such as silence, meekness, forgiveness, and bearing humble testimony are passive or weak. But, to “love [our] enemies, bless them that curse [us], do good to them that hate [us], and pray for them which despitefully use [us], and persecute [us]” (Matthew 5:44) takes faith, strength, and, most of all, Christian courage.

The Prophet Joseph Smith demonstrated this courage throughout his life. Though he “suffer[ed] severe persecution at the hands of all classes of men, both religious and irreligious” (Joseph Smith—History 1:27), he did not retaliate or give in to hatred. Like all true disciples of Christ, he stood with the Savior by loving others in a tolerant and compassionate way. That is Christian courage.

When we do not retaliate—when we turn the other cheek and resist feelings of anger—we too stand with the Savior. We show forth His love, which is the only power that can subdue the adversary and answer our accusers without accusing them in return. That is not weakness. That is Christian courage.


Hate in the Name of Love“:

What we have here is truly manipulative. Four justices create a right, and then a sympathetic attorney general renames a proposition so as to protect a 4-month-old right that no one had ever voted to create.

And the left accuses the right of imposing its values on society.

22 October 2008 @ 1:41 am | 2 comments

Targeting Mormons on Proposition 8

The Daily Kos does not appear to be a champion of free speech.

Last week Daily Kos removed a post criticizing the site for its anti-Mormon bigotry.

Now it is rallying its followers to target Mormons who have donated to the Proposition 8 campaign. Once identified, the plan is to dig into their backgrounds, with the hopes of harassing and discrediting their efforts.

As a matter of fact, the No on Prop 8 folks told me recently that the “Protect Marriage” campaign has raised $30 million dollars–over half of it from the Mormon Church. Now, I have nothing personally against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They most certainly have the constitutional right to worship in their own way. They have the right to minister in whatever way they see fit and to marry whomever they see fit in their churches based on any qualifications they choose. And they will be well within their rights.

But when the church and its members invest millions of dollars in an attempt to write discrimination into my state’s constitution and divorce my friend Brian against his will, there will be hell to pay.

So what am I asking you to do?

Some distributed research.

There is a list of a bunch of Mormon donors to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign (in case that one goes down, here’s a mirror with slightly worse formatting.

Here’s what I’m asking for:

This list contains information about those who are big donors to the Yes on 8 campaign–donors to the tune of at least $1,000 dollars. And, as you can see, there are a lot of them. It also indicates if they’re Mormon or not.

If you’re interested in defeating the religious right and preserving marriage equality, here’s how you can help:

Find us some ammo.

Use any LEGAL tool at your disposal. Use OpenSecrets to see if these donors have contributed to…shall we say…less than honorable causes, or if any one of these big donors has done something otherwise egregious. If so, we have a legitimate case to make the Yes on 8 campaign return their contributions, or face a bunch of negative publicity . . .

Feel free to use Lexis-Nexis searches as well for anything useful, especially given that these people are using “morality” as their primary motivation to support Prop 8…if you find anything that belies that in any way…well, you know what to do . . .

Here’s the bottom line for me: if someone is willing to contribute thousands of dollars to a campaign to take away legal rights from some very dear friends of mine, they had damn well make sure their lives are beyond scrutiny–because I, for one, won’t take it lying down.

Unfortunately, the media has played along with this emphasis by making Mormon donations to support Proposition 8 a major issue (never mind the millions big celebrities and others have given to opppose it).

I thought it was odd that the Associated Press included a link in this story to a site called Mormons for Proposition 8, which at first blush would appear to be a pro-Mormon site in the church’s efforts to preserve traditional marriage. However, it’s a ruse to “out” all Mormon donors and its purported benign motives have been betrayed by the Daily Kos.

Forget debating on the merits. When your personal politics is on the line, “by any means necessary” is an acceptable tactic. Personally attacking people and making their lives miserable is acceptable collateral damage in the pursuit of your idea of “fairness.”

P.S. Besides this coordinated harassment campaign, here’s an isolated but a very disturbing incident of violence against a Prop 8 supporter.

P.P.S. How are donors being identified as Mormon?

[via The Corner]




15 October 2008 @ 11:53 pm | 1 comment

Does anyone know how to find a cached version of a recent blog post w/o the assistance Google?

I came across a news alert for the following Daily Kos post: “Responding To Anti-Mormon Bigotry on DailyKos.” But as you can see by following the link, the post has been taken down despite having received some 482 comments. A Google search produces the link but no customary cached version. Perhaps it’s too recent.

15 October 2008 @ 12:33 am | 6 comments

On the heels of tonight’s broadcast encouraging California Members to support Proposition 8, the Church launches a new website: PreservingMarriage.org.

[via Messenger and Advocate]

8 October 2008 @ 11:26 pm | 7 comments

Senator Gordon Smith is under fire for apparently comparing polygamy with same-sex marriage.

During a gay rights forum in Washington, D.C., Gordon was asked to reconcile his support of domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples while also supporting a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman. . .

“Part of what I fear, as you start defining marriage — we have a long history of doing that in this country, and my Mormon pioneer ancestors were the victims of that. They were literally driven from the United States in the dead of winter for following their religious beliefs.”

“I don’t want that coming back,” Smith continued. “But there are some on the front pages of your newspapers who are trying to now.”

On Friday, Smith issued a statement reaffirmed [sic] his support of gay rights while clarifying his stand on the definition of marriage. “I have been a strong proponent of gay rights — such as domestic partner benefits, ENDA (anti-discrimination laws) and stronger prosecution of hate crimes,” the senator said, “but I oppose changes in the current definition of marriage.”

On Tuesday Smith apologized for mentioning polygamy in the discussion of gay rights. “If you’d grown up a Mormon, and spent your life trying to get out from the shadow of that legacy — it’s an emotional scar that you carry,” Smith told his home state paper. “I meant no offense by sharing that part of my history.”

I’m not sure what the Senator meant by injecting his “emotional scar” into the discussion. But at the same time I don’t understand why polygamy can’t be mentioned alongside same-sex marriage.

If same-sex marriage should be legal by what standard should polygamy be barred? I’m sure Sen. Smith didn’t mean it like this, but if homosexuality is the civil rights movement of our day, modeled after black civil rights, what’s to stop polygamists from doing the same?


Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) was on satellite radio last week applauding California’s gay marriage decision. While bemoaning how “born-again Christians and their right wing loonies” were going to make a democratic ballot inititiave “nasty” he turned his attention to Mormons.

I wonder what they’re going to do with the Mormons. I’d like to put polygamy up if they want to fight this battle. Let’s go into Utah and have it out. I mean, I don’t have any quarrel with polygamy, as long as they leave little kids alone, which is child abuse.

But if you want to have three husbands, be my guest. I think that to me, that’s your decision.

I think it’s kind of humorous you’re going to find the Mormons leading the fight against gay marriage, which is an interesting commentary on what you believe.

It would help to avoid getting nasty if he got his facts straight.

19 May 2008 @ 1:15 pm | No comments

LDS Church statement on California gay marriage decision:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes that same sex marriage can be an emotional and divisive issue. However, the church teaches that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is the basic unit of society. Today’s California Supreme Court decision is unfortunate.

15 May 2008 @ 5:36 pm | No comments

Eugene Volokh (who approves of same-sex marriage recognition) looks at how today’s and other decisions prove the slippery slope argument can be valid.

[I]t seems to me that decisions such as the California, Massachusetts, and Vermont ones illustrate that it’s a mistake to just factually dismiss the claims that slippage is possible. When we’re dealing with a legal system that’s built on analogy and precedent (both binding precedent and persuasive precedent), slippery slope risks have to be taken seriously.

15 May 2008 @ 4:08 pm | 3 comments

On March 4, the California Supreme Court will hear a challenge to state law that upholds traditional marriage between a man and a woman. The Church has joined with other churches in filing a friend of the court brief asking the court to uphold the current law

On one side are the Mormon church, the California Catholic Conference, the National Association of Evangelicals and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations. They describe marriage between a man and a woman as “the lifeblood of community, society and the state” and say any attempt by the courts to change that would create “deep tensions between civil and religious understandings of that institution.”

On the other side are the Unitarians, the United Church of Christ, the Union for Reform Judaism, the Soka Gakkai branch of Buddhism, and dissident groups of Mormons, Catholics and Muslims. Saying their faiths and a wide range of historical traditions honor same-sex unions, they argue that the current law puts the state’s stamp of approval on “the religious orthodoxy of some sects concerning who may marry.”

The brief on behalf of the Church and its allies was written by Kenneth Starr (of Clinton impeachment fame) and argues that, regardless of religion, traditional marriage is essential for a healthy society.

“We have seen at close range the enormous benefits that traditional male-female marriage imparts,” he wrote. “We have also witnessed the substantial adverse consequences for children that often flow from alternative household arrangements.”

The “inescapable truth,” Starr said, is that “children need their mothers and fathers, and that society needs mothers and fathers to raise their children.”

His clients’ argument is not based on their religious beliefs, he said, but on “historical and sociological facts about what marriage has always been across time and cultures,” and on the doctrine that courts must let the people and their representatives decide such fundamental questions.

The brief can be found at the court’s website here [PDF]. It’s nice to see that although there were 50 some briefs files, the Church was joined by like-minded Catholics, Evangelicals, and Jews.

Also, Evergreen International, an LDS-supportive group for dealing with same-sex attraction filed a separate brief with similar organizations affiliated with other denominations [PDF]. 

Opponents of the California law claim that same-sex marriage has been around much longer than believed and that the law violates religious freedom.  The brief for religious organizations joined in opposing the law can be found here [PDF].  Despite the SF Chronicle’s highlighting that “dissident groups of Mormons” signed on to the opposing brief, I only recognized one Mormon-affiliated group (Affirmation) among the long list of religious organizations.

The CA Supreme Court has a special page for the case, In re Marriage Cases, with all the briefs and filings.

[edited for clarity, I hope]


Candidates On Civil Unions and Same-Sex Marriage:

  • Hillary Clinton: Does not directly support same-sex marriage, but voted against a constitutional ban on them. Supports civil unions.
  • Barack Obama: Does not directly support same-sex marriage, but also voted against a constitutional ban on them. Supports civil unions.
  • John McCain: Opposes same-sex marriage, but has a mixed record on whether it should be allowed by individual states; like Clinton and Obama, voted against a constitutional ban. Does not overtly support civil unions, but would not stop states from allowing them.
  • Mitt Romney: Opposes both same-sex marriages and supports a constitutional ban on them. Also opposes civil unions.
  • Mike Huckabee: Like Romney, opposes same-sex marriages and supports a constitutional amendment to ban them. Also opposes civil unions.
  • Ron Paul: Has a mixed record on same-sex marriages and civil unions, but because of his libertarian background, he’s considered the most liberal of the Republicans on gay rights issues. Opposes a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages.

Thanks, IMAPP

5 February 2008 @ 10:46 am | 2 comments

Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid’s BYU speech discussed his upbringing, conversion, and his basic political beliefs and how they have influenced his career and perspective on public service.  Senator Reid’s prepared text can be found here.

Senator Reid had the good sense (if not class) to wait to criticize the political beliefs of past Church leaders, President Bush, and conservative christians in a press conference following his speech.

Some past prominent LDS Church leaders wrongly pressed conservatism on church members, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday during a press conference at Brigham Young University.

The Nevada senator attacked President Bush and evangelical Christians while saying members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints need to worry less about abortion and gay marriage and more about health care, global warming, education and jobs . . .

“I think people in the church have to understand there are issues more important than abortion and gay marriage.”

The Church, as an institution, would appear to think otherwise as it has made the rare exception to voice its political opinion on abortion and gay marriage and not health care, global warming, nor jobs.

 On past church leaders,:

Reid said Ezra Taft Benson, active in very conservative politics before he became a president of the LDS Church, and Ernest L. Wilkinson, the president of BYU from 1951-71, were among past church leaders “who were very right-wing people politically.”

“Members of the church are obedient,” Reid said, “they are followers in the truest sense of the word, and I think they’ve taken members of the church down a path that is the wrong path. Look at Joseph Smith. Here’s a man who was progressive, to say the least. He broke from the pack. He did things differently than they’d been done. He was against slavery. He wanted to start a national bank.

The SL Trib adds Sen. Reid’s actual comments on President Benson:

In the past years we’ve had some very prominent members of the church, like Ezra Taft Benson, who are really right-wing people. Members of the church are obedient and followers in the true sense of the word, but these people have taken members of the church down the path that is the wrong path.

Understandably, being a party’s standard bearer can be a tough role to play, but right after speaking about King Benjamin’s example and service to God, Senator Reid took some rather uncharitable digs at President Bush:

“They have focused on just a few issues, flag-burning, gay marriage, abortion,” Reid said. “The country has gone beyond that to other issues. We have a country that needs to do something about health care. Global warming is here. We have a president who doesn’t know how to pronounce the words.”

and at evangelicals:

Reid also told reporters the Republican Party has been driven by evangelical Christians for 20 years. “They are the most anti-Christian people I can imagine, the people from the Christian far right.”

More first hand accounts at Hot Blava and by Gordon Smith at Conglomerate.

The BYU Democrats had their own meeting with with Senator Reid and a photo gallery where the Senator posed with many of its members.


Same sex marriage is the gift that keeps on giving to Mitt Romney. First, it helped establish Gov. Romney as a cultural conservative when Massachusetts courts forced the issue.  Now, Iowa of all places follows suit just in time for Romney to distinguish himself from the better known GOP competition in a radio ad.