June 27, 2008

Californians React to Mormon Marriage Meddling

Backstory: Mormons Launch Full-Scale Attack on Marriage Equality (Like They Have Room to Talk?), June 24, 2008

Editor - I see once again the Church of Latter-Day Saints is involving itself in California politics (”Mormons urged to back ban,” June 25). They just don’t get it that it’s God who creates some people gay. It’s too bad they don’t believe in the Bible. If they did, they would have to follow the admonishment, “Judge not that ye be not judged.”

DAVE WILCOX
Walnut Creek

Editor - In your article about the Mormon Church openly backing the initiative to ban gays from marriage, both from the pulpit and by raising funds to make anti-gay ads etc., it mentioned that such activities by the church do not run afoul of the “church in politics” rules of the IRS.

So this means that those who are for the initiative can organize and fund their position with pre-tax dollars while those of us who are against the initiative must spend after-tax dollars to defend ourselves? Wow! This sounds like something Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe would think up! Well, but then they both claim God’s blessings.

TED HAX
Woodside

Editor - I really do not understand why some people, and now the Mormon Church officially, want to impose their perception of civil marriage onto all of society. I understood the history of this country was based on escaping dictatorial state-run churches and governments.

It is un-American to impose by law the beliefs of a church upon everyone in the state. Civil marriage is a civil issue, a civil right. As I understand our recent state Supreme Court ruling, religious practice is not affected. The court is not directing any faith to change or amend its practice or belief in marriage.

Our world needs more loving marriages and fewer broken homes and much less promiscuity. These seem like worthy social goals to me. Churches should stay out of civil matters which do not affect them or their members.

DOUG SIBLEY
Martinez

Read some 300 more comments here:

Why is a church involved in politics? Their tax exempt status should be revoked.

. . .

Bigots.

. . .

Institutionalized racism until 1978. Institutionalized bigotry, still.

. . .

Their position is wrong in so many ways, but it’s really kind of sad to see people living in such irrational, unsubstantiated fear. You’d think these people lived in T. H. White’s ant colony in The Once And Future King, where “everything not forbidden is compulsory”, and therefore the ability to marry either a man or a woman will put their coreligionists in an intractable pickle. I have yet to hear anybody offer a scintilla of evidence that allowing gays to marry will have even the slightest effect on the rate or success of straight marriages.

. . .

Have you noticed that opposition to same-sex marriage is EXCLUSIVELY grounded in religion? Think about it … there is NO secular opposition to same-sex marriage.

. . .

Some things are too important to be left up to majority rule, namely the protection of minority rights. A christian church should realize this.

. . .

Whatever you folks want to do in Zion (Utah) is your business. California is off limits.

. . .

Forget Al Qaeda, we’ve got terrorists in our own backyard that want to take away our freedoms - they’re called the Catholic and Mormon churches. Please don’t let these zealots attack America’s freedoms - do not give money to Mormon or Catholic organizations!!

. . .

Organizations the size of the LDS (Mormons) and the Catholic Church are NOT non-profit, along with a whole host of others. You should see some of the places of worship built in California within the past 20 years. These organizations know how to make money. They are either entitled to their political agendas or non-profit status, but not both.

. . .

If you’re Mormon, it wasn’t that long ago in human history that God Himself redefined marriage to be between only two people (and of course it was only 30 years ago that God decided it would be okay for black men to be elders in the church, just like every white man is by default). So my thinking is, the Mormon God is on a dialup connection and he’s just got a big backlog of emails to send down to the latest Prophet. Were I the Prophet or one of his followers, I wouldn’t be quite so hasty to lock down a concrete definition of marriage again.

. . .

This is about what I would expect from the Church of Later Day Saints. They are always alarmed when it comes to being criticized about their “cult like ways”, their legacy of polygamy, or their past of institutionalized racism. But the truth is, despite their missionary work abroad - their mindset is very provincial at best, and quite frankly - vert out of step with modern western culture. This is why Mitt Romney lost his bid for the presidency, And why he will never get there. Most people do not trust the Mormons

. . .

ahh yes, the Mormon church.. that bastion of morality and believers in the sanctity of plural marriage. one man, several women.

. . .

And this from a cult that not too long ago allowed multiple wives. But if it comes to money, they look the other way - they’ll gladly take 10% of each cult members salary but the greatest hipocrisy is thier interests in Las Vegas.

. . .

Mormons see gay marriage as morally wrong . The Mormon religion was founded by practicing Poligimy. But to them marrying their 13 year girls to a 50 year old man is ok even without her consent in certain sects.. And with a history of poligimy this cult religion has no room to tell anyone how to live.

. . .

Oh great. The descendants of Brigham Young’s 55 wives will now lecture on the subject of marriage morality. Lovely.

. . .

Lol! The Mormon church has “progressed” from polygamy, to racial bigotry, and now to “defenders of marriage. Defending it from WHAT I have yet to hear one person explain to me. Perfect example of the carpet-bagging Christian Taliban trying to force others to their own dubious moral code. Religious organizations have no right to foist their dogma onto to others or into law. Period. This is not a theocracy.

. . .

What the church is advocating is a violation of the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution. They are perfectly within their rights to define what a religious marriage is in their church, and they can restrict it to skew-eyed people born on the ides of March for all of me; I am not a Mormon and care not a whit for their rules so long as they do not demand that I live by them. When they demand that their followers establish their religious definition of marriage in our secular republic, though, they cross the line. Jefferson had things right centuries ago when he penned a religious freedom statute that kept church and state separate. The churches that are trampling on that line now need to be vigorously prosecuted until they start living up to that expectation once again.

. . .

I remember the strong and organized opposition the Mormon church had in the ’70s to the equal rights amendment to the US Constitution. Their arguments against it were reactionary and unfounded, e.g., “if it passes, people will be forced to use unisex public restrooms.” (The horror!) That amendment did not pass, and historians usually site the Mormon church’s highly organized efforts as a large factor in its defeat. However, while the church’s Utah leadership is staunchly conservative and unyielding in its sweeping condemnation of homosexuality, the California members, especially in the Bay Area, are a little more willing to take a hands off approach when it comes to personal matters, even if they are reluctant to admit that publically. I am hopeful that in the privacy of the voting booth many California Mormons will vote their conscience instead of blindly following this Utah mandate.

. . .