|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:20 am
Feelings regarding the Church's involvement in the passing of Proposition 8 in California?
For those of you living under a rock, this bans, in the CA constitution, marriage between homosexual people using the words "One man,One woman"
Now, the church used TWENTYFIVE MILLION Tithing dollars on tv ads and the like to get this passed.
My problems with this?
1. Obvious violation of tax exemption rules. We should, in all justice, lose our tax exempt status over this. Which would financially ruin the church.
2. We believe in polygamy. Not that it is 'something we did' but that one man can still be sealed to multiple women in the temple. Blatant hypocrisy.
3. That money could have changed lives for the better. Could have fed everyone in *choose your African country* Statistically, 3 children die of starvation every minute. And we put our tithing money to this? Starvation!
4. The big plan was to let us choose which side of the fence we wanted, to choose whether to live G-d's plan. AGENCY. We are removing it from thousands of people who only want respect. Also, refer to our Articles of Faith. They mention things like letting people worship "who, what and where they may" Read the rest of them. Or the books we believe in
5. Why, exactly, should these people's rights be taken away? Why shouldn't a pair of people who love each other get tax breaks or emergency room visitation rights? Why are we so threatened by attatching the word "marriage" to such relationships? They exist one way or another and denying these rights doesn't "protect" anything. Except a painful, bigoted world view.
Did I miss anything? Yes. I'll continue if anyone reads this.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:08 pm
A couple of issues, Dancing.
1) Do you know for a fact that tithing dollars were used? The church has investments and companies of its own, meaning income that it can spend as it wishes in the wider scope of the world.
2) No one was talking about taking any of the rights you mention away from homosexuals. California already has a "domestic partnership" arrangement that confers the rights you're concerned about.
Anyway, I'm proud to see the church standing up for what it preaches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:43 pm
I'd like to see more reasons from both sides. I'm rather ambivalent on the subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Itesa, you're a very wise woman. *applauds*
Arizona had a similar issue this past election and I'll tell you now that the church isn't forcing anyone on any law making. Several times in our stake conference and meetings did they tell us it was the church's standing on a moral issue and not on legal rights.
Furthermore, this is something that can lead to a domino effect that could cause the end of our whole nation. 1) homosexual marriages means no kids(yes I know about adoption, but not all of them do that. in fact, very few do). 2) no kids means no future. 3) skewed thoughts of others can effect those around us and could lead to more problems in society. I know there's a lot of 'could's and 'if's in here, but with the rate our society is going, it's very likely.
Really, we're just trying to head off a problem in the future. If the constitution in more than one state leads to others being changed, it can even lead to an argument in the supreme court. That can get the official constitution changed which can furthermore lead us all down the wrong path. remember, so long as the people in this land is righteous and follows god's plan, we'll be okay here. If we stray (I know we're already far off as a whole but for the moment...) we're doomed. So, I think the church and us as individuals are trying to uphold the true constitution by speaking out about this moral dilemma.
And don't forget the old phrase. "If California goes, the whole country follows" or something like that. Maybe that's why it's on a fault line...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:34 am
There are also some studies that were done in Europe where they found that after same-sex marriages were legalized even the "normal heterosexual" marriages became more likely to run into problems and divorces because the "moral line" was more ambiguous and marriage was not "held as sacred, but more secular."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:41 pm
We wee talking about this in my Old Testament class here at BYU-I. If Prop 8 had passed, temple marriages would be in jepoardy because there is no way that same-sex sealings would ever be allowed. That would lead to them becoming illegal, since they would then be "violating the rights of the people".
And then just something to think about: According to the Apocrypha, do you know the only other time in the world's recorded history when there was state-sanctioned gay marriage? No, it's not Soddom and Gomorrah--It was during the time of Noah. And we all know what happened then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:51 pm
1. believe you can only loose your tax exempt status if you give money to someone running in an election (local or national) Proposition 8 money wasn't given to someone it was given to a cause.
2. I don't see the hypocrisy. Polygamy is mentioned through out the scriptures. In Doctrine and Covenants and a few of the prophets. Abraham, Isreal, David, Saul. And so is homosexual marriage and it is mentioned as a sin.
3. Would you rather let a child die and go to the celestial kingdom or let a homosexual couple get married and be doomed to the telestial kingdom?
4. So lets say you have two friends. Suzzi and Joey. So Suzzi shows up one day and says looking what I found. Want to try one? You know that it is Meth, but Joey doesn't. Will you mention something and try to stop him from taking it or will you let him practice his agency?
Yes we do have agency, but there are guidelines and boundaries to our agency. We could go out and kill everyone that hates us if we wanted to, but we choose to follow god's commandments.
5. The reason they had the right to marry was because the California supreme court over turned the proposition passed 8 years ago. They said that the people's minds had changed. Itesa mentioned the "domestic partnership."
I believe the most important reason why we did this though is because the prophet asked us to.
"Whether by my own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same." D&C 1: 38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:22 am
Nyx, opinions are fine to have, but tearing others down because of theirs is wrong. Please watch what you say in this guild. For now I'll delete that post.
And Dancing, I'm sure the church didn't use the tithing money. They have other resources as Itesa mentioned. They know very well what their decisions might do to them financially. Remember, you have men of God at the head of this church and he wouldn't let them do anything to harm the church. There are certain circumstances (i.e. the death of a spouse) where people get sealed in the temple more than once but it's not to have multiple wives. The articles of faith do say that but they also say that mankind will only be saved through the atonement by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. The Family: A Proclamation to the World states that marriage between a man and a woman is essential to God's eternal plan. Not being able to marry the same sex does not take away any agency as far as I can tell. Perhaps you should take this up with your bishop or someone who knows what to tell you or knows who you need to talk to. Might even try praying about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:37 am
Sin is also quite often couched as "politically correct choices" such as third term abortions (after the fetus could live outside the womb and they are 'vacuumed' out piece by piece without any anesthesia for the baby) being called "pro-choice" and not abortion. I guess the question should be do we believe in the church and it's teachings or just pick and choose which teachings are easy or convenient to live. That is what free agency is about - but we have to remember that along with the choices come the consequence - good or bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:06 am
Shinikaze Nyx, opinions are fine to have, but tearing others down because of theirs is wrong. Please watch what you say in this guild. For now I'll delete that post. And Dancing, I'm sure the church didn't use the tithing money. They have other resources as Itesa mentioned. They know very well what their decisions might do to them financially. Remember, you have men of God at the head of this church and he wouldn't let them do anything to harm the church. There are certain circumstances (i.e. the death of a spouse) where people get sealed in the temple more than once but it's not to have multiple wives. The articles of faith do say that but they also say that mankind will only be saved through the atonement by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. The Family: A Proclamation to the World states that marriage between a man and a woman is essential to God's eternal plan. Not being able to marry the same sex does not take away any agency as far as I can tell. Perhaps you should take this up with your bishop or someone who knows what to tell you or knows who you need to talk to. Might even try praying about it. I was in a REALLy bad mood when i posted that and i said nothing wrong. I didn't even tear them down and didn't say anything about their opinion. I just asked if they paid attention in church and I gave much information that was FACT rather than what they said. Never did i say anything distructive so don't slander my freaking name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:05 pm
I was just talking to my dad about this and he said that the LDS church itself didn't donate anything. It was all the members that made the donations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:22 pm
Kasi Karra I was just talking to my dad about this and he said that the LDS church itself didn't donate anything. It was all the members that made the donations. indeed, i said that in my post that got deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:31 pm
The news coming out about this stuff has been SO SAD. For me it was hard to stand behind Prop 8 100% because I have friends and FAMILY who I love dearly that struggle with SSA. I knew this would hurt them. BUT I know that the leaders of the church SPEAK FOR THE LORD. And for whatever reason, they have asked us to take a stand on this cause. But now I am beginning to wonder if PART of the reason is to test and try us... and to see if we can withstand real persecutions. Quote: Prop 8 Protesters Target the LDS Los Angeles TempleThe LDS Temple in Los Angeles was under siege yesterday by 2,000 protesters angry over the Church's role in passing Proposition 8, forcing the temporary closure of the temple. According to reports, a gay activist called the temple saying they would be protesting outside the temple permanently until there is gay marriage. Signs were hung from the fence around the temple and protesters screamed in anger, snarled afternoon rush-hour traffic and said, "This isn't going to stop us...If we do this we have a chance." "We're going to fight it until the world changes," protesters claimed. "Shame on you," chanted the protesters. Outside the temple, grafitti was scrawled on the walls and signs hung, "Go back to Utah," and "Go to hell Mormons." Their signs said, "No on H8." Protesters promised to go after the Church's tax-exempt status and harass Mormons who had donated to the cause, listed on a website Mormonsfor8.com. The promise was to make the Mormons pay for their role in the passage of Prop 8. One LDS member in the area said, "I don't quite understand our police response (even though I'm one of the police). If this was happening at a Jewish synagogue or a Catholic church, we would be arresting people for hate crimes. As it is at the moment, protestors are sitting on the walls of the temple and the police are on the grounds inside. Church members in our area were called last night to come down to the stake center and spend the night protecting the building from vandalism -- it's like 150 years ago." To see a news report on these events click here.This was the politics of intimidation and harassment, targeting the LDS church, though many other churches had helped in the effort-and a sample of how the homosexual agenda has spread across the nation. It was like San Francisco mayor, Gavin Newsome, said when he illegally started marrying couples in the city before that America was going to have this whether you like it or not. It will not be about people being able to vote their conscience, or calmly assess the issues and consequences, but about threats and vilification. Other churches who participated in the effort have not been similarly targeted. The LDS Church is, of course, in no danger of losing its tax-exempt status. The only donation made to the campaign according to records was $2,078.97, an expense which covered the travel of church leaders who went to California to meet with the coalition. The Church insists that by law it has the right to speak out on moral issues. Threats from Blogs Target ChristiansA Worldnetdaily.com article noted that homosexual blogs have been boiling with threats toward Christians. Burn their [blank] churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers," wrote "World O Jeff" on a blog. On another website "Tread" wrote, "I hope the No on 8 people have a long list and long knives." On another website, a contributor wrote, "Can someone in CA please go burn down the Mormon temples there, PLEASE. I mean seriously. DO IT." On another website "scottinsf" wrote, "Trust me. I've got a big list of names of mormons and catholics that were big supporters of Prop 8. ... As far as mormons and catholics ... I warn them to watch their backs." Another blog entry: "If you're planning a heterosexual wedding in California ... be prepared for picketers. Designate someone to watch the parking lot ... You're going to have lots of unexpected expenses. Add $500 to your budget for security. ... Be prepared for the flowers not lasting to the reception or the tuxedos showing up two sizes too small or the music at the reception being a way too loud or the cake tasting a little funny," stated another threat. "Be afraid. Be very afraid. We are everywhere." Thus it continues on and on and Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs for Liberty Counsel called the statements "hate crimes" for their intent to create violence against someone based on their beliefs and called on the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and "other leaders within the homosexual lobby" to call for an end to such threats. Thus, the true colors of some of those who push this agenda are in clear display. It is a kind of domestic terrorism designed to silence and quell anyone who oppose this agenda as it marches through our nation. On the same day, this happened, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, issued a statement calling for mutual civility. "No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated or harassed." It is a call to turn the other cheek. http://familyleader.net/Home/servlet/staticContent?contentTitle=about_us Most of us have had it pretty easy. The church has been seeming to many more and more mainstream. But now, well, we are not. We are FORCED to stand out. I am kind of wondering with some of the things I am reading, if it's a last days thing... this might grow into an even bigger hatred... and all the while we might be slipping into another Great Depression type thing? I just don't know. confused But, ummm, Food storage, right?! sweatdrop If ye are prepared ye shall not fear! mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:25 pm
( redface Sorry Nyx. I didn't get to read your post before it was deleted) Anyone see this horrible commercial http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q28UwAyzUkEthis is called getting out of hand. If you pause the vide at the very beginning before they open the door it says "Dramatization. Not intended to depict actual persons or events" But who would be able to read that if it was on real tv? I went to that mormonfor8.com website, it's scary. They have the names of almost everyone that donated money to yes for prop 8 and what city they live in. This is like torture where you know that that kind of information is on the web and any one can read it. crying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
