Protestors at the Oakland Temple

So they staged a protest at gates of a place that was closed on Sunday, and apparently some members of the press showed up to report this artificial event? Sounds like so many of the street screechers here in Salt Lake who come out when there are arrangements for cameras, but not otherwise, and certainly not in bad weather. Commitment to a cause goes only so far, you know.

Thanks for this, Dave. Nice, even coverage of what could easily have been written up as another divisive story. This is a tough subject for many people; I don’t believe for a moment that the majority of LDS parishioners “hate” gays, but it does greatly sadden me that the Church has become so engaged in governmental affairs. That said, I like to see even-keeled discussion on the topic and am glad to know that you stay true to the title of your blog. I love you!!

Nick
It wouldbe more Christlike to go and sin no more; not not stand at his temple and shout “I don’t care what you say I’m going to do what I want.”
All we can do is pray for them.

I don’t mean to come across harshly, but that is what I believe to be the heart of the emotion felt with this proposition. (exuse my spelling, I should have paid attention in elementary school)

Tim, I haven’t said anything on this issue publicly before, but your comment prompted me to post on how I see this. I agree with the church’s stand that engaging in homosexual activities (unless the participants are a legally married husband and wife) is a sin. However, I realize others don’t see this the way I do, and discrimination is a bigger problem for me in this case than legal enforcement of moral values. Also, allowing gays to call their unions marriage doesn’t affect my marriage at all. If I was master of the universe for a day, I’d prefer that we take the state out of marriage altogether and call all state contracts that grant domestic partner rights civil unions, and make marriage a purely religious institution. Barring that, however, I’m fine with gays and lesbians calling their unions whatever they want.

As far as I am concerned, homosexuals can call their unions whatever they want, as long as they don’t sue our or anyone else’s church for refusing to marry them or for refusing to adopt children out to them. If they want separation of church and state, then make it a two-way street. Get your same-sex marriage from the state or from churches that have no problem performing them and adopt your children from same. Unfortunately, since the homosexual agenda is not about equal rights, but about domination and destruction of our religious policies through their legal challenges, we have to take a stand for judeo-christian marriage between a man and a woman just to survive. Our organizations depend on tax exempt status and contributions of those who believe to stay open. If parishioners saw their contributions going to legal funds instead of to help the needy and run the religious part of the church, many would stop contributing. I predict that if Prop 8 is defeated, it will be a matter of days before the LDS Church and other churches will be sued in California courts to demand compliance to same-sex marriage or lose their tax exemption. Secular Progressives will fund these suits in an effort to make churches disappear. Dear gay people, if you leave us alone as I described, most of us would not care about your same-sex marriage. But I believe you won’t stop at that. If your side wins, you will come after us with total disregard for our faith and demand our submission.

Nick, I’ve not seen anything that specifies whether the decision to hold the protest on Sunday was due to the organizers’ charity towards Mormons, or their ignorance of Mormon temple worship. Can you point to anything authoritative?

JimD, I don’t know that the protesters intentionally chose a time when the temple was closed, nor did I say that they did. What I said was that it would be charitable and “christlike” to express appreciation that they happened to choose that time.

Most of us get more cooperation by praising the good we see in others, rather than doing all we can to demonize “the opposition.”

Nick, I was not referring to your entry. Personally, I would not be inclined to defend anything Pat Robertson says. He is way out there in many of his views. But if you think I am jumping to conclusions about the agenda, I am certain you have heard of a Christian fertility specialist in San Diego who refused to artificially inseminate a lesbian woman, but gave referrals to several other doctors who would accomodate her. She insisted he perform it, sued him, and won. That doctor either had to perform said procedure or lose his license. As I said, they are not looking for acceptance, but destruction of anyone who does not agree with their behavior. I stand by my statement. Leave the churches and individual conscientious objectors alone and most of us will not protest the rights of homosexuals to seek marriage and adoption from sympathetic churches and the state.

As a side note, the court was wrong on the aforementioned case, as the doctors of the clinic were not denying necessary “medical care,” but an elective procedure that could be performed elsewhere. The court placing a blanket definition of “medical care” on that procedure opens the door for others to sue for “medical care” for other non-essential treatment, such as vanity surgeries. I make the same argument against medical insurance companies charging me higher premiums to pay for elective abortion authorized to other patients. After all, if you can electively kill your baby and have the insurance company pay for it, then I should be covered for elective plastic surgery… given I am so ugly.

I am the original poster of the story you referenced about the woman (Susanne) being harassed while going to her Stake Temple Night. When you stated that it was possibly bogus, I did everything in my power to find out. The moderator of the email group she originally posted her story on has confirmed the validity. See the comments on the post at http://preservingmarriage.blogspot.com/2008/10/one-side-is-right-and-one-side-is-wrong.html

I just hate seeing a link to our site with the phrase “possibly bogus”

Prop 8 has truly brought out the good, bad and ugly in huamnity. Those extremists who are the ones getting the attention do not represent the majority of all of us - both pro and agaist Prop 8. The same extremism is what brought it to this point - a single judge changing law that was put into place by the voters a few years ago. How can one judge represent the voice of the people?
The reality is that the equal rights all are using as “cover” on this are already in place. This whole argument is about a word “marriage” that has represented a male/female relationship for 1000’s of years.
The danger in altering what this word means is that it opens the door for basically all kinds of relationships to be called “marriage” - polygamy, cults, etc.
Why is not acceptable for the male gay community to call their union a male domestic partnership and lesbians the same?
What happens if married folks start referring to themseves as “gay”?
There are better ways to resolve this than to change the definition of a word.
Jeff H.

Miss Walsh, as the one who posted the claim of a homosexual agenda, I will answer your claim of our discrimination. And I want to reiterate, if your side would simply allow us Bible-adhering Christians to practice our faith without having to worry about being sued for not artificially inseminating lesbians, not adopting out to same-sex couples, and not sealing same in our temples, then I would personally not care if you sought and obtained a marriage, adoption, and or insemination by those willing to perform such ceremonies/procedures. Our faith believes strongly in “agency,” which is the right to personal choice. All we are trying to protect is our right to not be party to such acts.

And our “discrimination” is out ours, but God’s. Even in the New Testament, we are warned we should not be deceived, that those who practice the acts listed in 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Along with fornication, those who engage in homosexual acts and do not repent, which means to abandon and turn away, from such acts, will not return to the presence of God. If you have a problem with our doctrine, show us in the Scripture where we are wrong. Though the Savior saved the woman caught in adultery from being stoned, He may not have judged her, but he told her to go and sin no more. He loved the sinner, but did not tolerate her bahavior. If you wish to stay in a same-sex relationship, be assured, the LDS Church is the only Bible-adhering Christian church that will not say you will be condemned to hell, as we believe you would inherit the Telestial Kingdom, a lessor kingdom in Heaven, but still a kingdom. Again, choice in our faith is a prime directive. All we ask is for our right to be left to practice what we believe. And to not have to apologize for God’s law.

And for those self-described “former” members who want to practice same-sex relationships, how ignorant do you have to be to demand we seal you in the temple? If you are telling the truth about growing up in our faith, did you ever crack open your Scriptures? If you did, did your eyes glaze over the verses condemning any sexual activity outside marriage between male and female? If you have a problem with our doctrine, why would you want to be a part of it? The LDS Church is not a secular club or association where democracy dictates rules and regulations. This is religion, a Theocracy we wish to keep separate from the State. Again, that means both ways. You could not possibly believe your attempt at coercing our church into accepting your behavior would change what God says is acceptable behavior. Or are you that unreasonable? Let me be the first to say, sincerely, Go, have a good life with whomever you choose to live it, and kindly leave us alone. Thank you in advance for your consideration toward us and our desires to follow God according to the dictates of our own conscience.

I find a few things here ironic,
that the LDS which faced rampant legal discrimination(often based on biblical quotations by Protestants et al) during its first century would now engage in the same activity. Congratulations, the Mormon Church, the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Jews and those at the black churches have now made second class citizens of homosexuals and utter hypocrites of themselves.

Marriage is a legal contract that carries many benefits and costs. IT’s not exclusively the realm of the religious as you think it is. And if you think you can accept government money, let’s say at a hospital or health clinic, or save billions taxes without having to give something notable back then forget your tax exemptions and pay taxes like the rest of us instead of being the freeloaders that you are.

Someone remind me why we allow you guys to pay no property taxes. Oakland sure can use the money because the rest of you sure aren’t spending much of it on good works. Which leads to ….

the obscene amount of money spent on this campaign blows my mind.
Did you know it costs St. Anthony’s dining room 33 cents to provide a meal?
75 million dollars equals 75 million meals for the poor.
That’s like supplying 75,000 meals a day for 1,000 days at St. Anthony’s.
At a time when Glide, St. Anthony’s St. Vincent dePaul are going through shortfalls it’s good to know that all you pro-discrimination-types with full bellies are enjoying a restful night’s sleep.

If there’s one thing I am sure of, no one, whether they are Christian, Mormon etc, has really paid more than lip service to Matthew 25.

and for god’s sake, stop blaming God for your discriminatory behavior.
Own up to your own personal actions as God would have you do on your final day.
Talk about passing the buck.

Obviously you have no answer to my observations but as a courtesy I will answer yours.

1) In order to enter into a marriage, a couple must obtain a marriage license and ’solemnize’ it – this requires having a ceremony with one to two official witnesses. Couples can enter a domestic partnership by filling out and mailing in a form, the notarized Declaration of Domestic Partnership. They do not need to obtain a license, have witnesses, or ’solemnize’ the partnership with a ceremony.
2) California courts have jurisdiction to dissolve domestic partnerships regardless of where the parties live. But CA courts don’t have jurisdiction to dissolve a marriage unless the parties meet the residency requirements for a CA divorce. Under CA law, a judgment of dissolution of marriage may not be entered unless one of the parties to the marriage has been a resident of California for at least six months and of the county in which they are filing for divorce for the three months before they file. This means that couples from other states who come to CA to get married will be unable to obtain a divorce in the event of a later break-up unless either they actually move to CA or their home state decides to recognize CA marriages.

3) Most important. With domestic partnerships you create the rather obscene legal argument called “separate but equal”, used quite often by segregationists when they had objections to black kids going to their white kids’ school. In essence you are encoding into the state constitution second-class citizenship by no other reasons than religious ones. The parallel of bigotry is obviously not lost on me.

4) The Constitutions of the US and California rule this land, not the bible.
In Perez v. Sharp, the CA SC in 1949 decided that the anti-miscegenation laws violated the 14th amendment rights of the US Constitution. The court held that marriage is a fundamental right and that laws restricting that right must not be based solely on prejudice(like yours). The court held that restrictions due to discrimination violated the constitutional requirements of due process and equal protection of the laws

14th Amendment.
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Summation:
What you dominionists have accomplished is the denial of equal protection under California law for homosexuals. At some point this will go to Federal court but here’s one thing that is working against you.
Time.
Prop 22 passed by a large margin. Prop 8 barely squeaked by. In 2 years it will be the same battle and your bigotry will probably lose as well it should. 10 years from now, no contest. So what I am really seeing right now is an act of abject pettiness and meanness.

You know, gays fight in wars and die for this country. The late Alan Rogers was the first gay soldier to die in the Iraq war.
http://www.sovo.com/2008/5-23/locallife/feature/8591.cfm
Prop 8 is how you dishonor his service.

There are gay officers and fire fighters that help to protect your church property as well as you and your loved ones. You don’t even pay the taxes for their services.
Prop 8 is how you dishonor them.

Then there’s the aforementioned immorality of spending tens of millions on Prop 8 while people go hungry and the homeless are all around.
Enjoy your full bellies, warm beds and cold hearts.

The LDS Church’s envolvement in Proposition 8 is about opposition to the Sin not the Sinner. I am 100% for Proposition 8 and am so grateful that it passed for it shows that there are still good people in California, Arizona and Florida. This just shows that there are still God-Fearing men and women in this world. My opinion would be the same if this was over prostitution. It is all immoral and not condoned by God. Please accept Democracy and the Pledge, ONE NATION UNDER GOD!

Oh, I forgot to add, I’m very glad Proposition 8 passed, and I hope the judiciary that invalidated the will of the citizens of California will not invalidate that political decision again. That being said, I would not have felt so good about Proposition 8 it it had actually attempted to cancel civil unions. As I see it, no civil rights were abridged by Prop 8, not should they be. Mormon religion does not hate homosexuals. Most (I hope) practicing Mormons don’t hate gays and lesbians, although I am sure there are some who are intolerant, as you would find in any large population. But the LDS Church does not preach hate, a fact lost on many of the protesters.

Brock, John, Ron
No one, absolutely no one is saying force the churches to marry gays. I don’t know WHERE you got that cockamamie idea except from some alarmist chicken little running around with the brain the size of a Rce Krispie.
If you don’t wish to associate with homosexuals I suggest you find 20 acres somewhere, put a fence around it and never leave. Gays are everywhere,
They are your National Guardsman, your cop, your fireman, your EMT, teacher, doctor, mechanic, store clerk, etc. they are the guys buried in Arlington and the Presidio,. They are your coworkers and government officials. Why the heck are you so afraid? And can the martyrdom, the only Mormons that died for me are the same as the gays that fought for me, from the Revolutionary War to Afghanistan.

Go live in fear of the world if you must but it’s a sad way to exist, besides the plain and drab fashions you’d have to wear.

As for perverting the God hates the sin etc… , obviously none of you know your history!!!! That came from Mahatma Gandhi and it got perverted in Christianity. It’s not even a great quote as I think it is rather two-faced and allows the user of the quote to basically bear false witness by trying to be two things at once.

As for not being hateful, you can say that all you want but you are judged by your actions and the results of those actions, in this case Prop. 8 was hateful.

Marcus.
you may need to reread my posting. no were in it did i say I didn’t want to hang around gays. I have, and had, more than one gay friend. teachers, coworkers etc. I don’t care who you sleep with. It is none of my business. The point I was trying to make was that you wish for the oppurtunity live and believe as you wish. We do not believe in same sex marriages. Find and read copy of “A proclamation to the world” the young or less experanced might not understand that you personaly may not wish to inflict damage to our beliefs that would forces us to act in a manner contrary to those beilefs.

Mormons are everywhere,
They are your National Guardsman, your cop, your fireman, your EMT, teacher, doctor, mechanic, store clerk, etc. they are the men and women buried in Arlington and the Presidio,. They are your coworkers and government officials. Why the heck are you so afraid?

“obviously none of you know your history!!!! That came from Mahatma Gandhi”
you are right I know nothing of Mahtma Gandhi exept that he wished for all people to live topgether and get along. However, This would be history from India.
As far as the Quote I didn’t make one. there are no Quotation mark in place there. Do you atuomaticly hate your friends when they do something you don’t like? Of course not, because you don’t always have to aggree with everybody,even if they are your friends.

“Go live in fear of the world if you must but it’s a sad way to exist, besides the plain and drab fashions you’d have to wear.”
You must be confusing “The church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints” with some of the fundamentlist, like Warren Jeffs.The only thing differant about the way we dress from main stream American dress, is we are counciled to dress modest, we shop at the same stores you do. dressess that cover at lest to the knees and not a lot of skin for both sexes I am currently wearing blue jeans and a t-shirt I got in Bagahdad.
As far as history check the “Poland Act” “The mormon battalion” A good movie to see is “Saints and Soilders”
God gave us the right to choose what we will, this is a fundmentle belief, I don’t wish to change your beilef system I don’t dislike you, I don’t know you’
you would be welcome to join my family in church on sunday, if anybody is not as eccepting of you as I am. Well I’m sure they will have an oppurtunity to discuss that with Heavenly father. on more thing as far as knowing history. there were no such thing as Mormons during the Revolution If there had been I am sure that they would have died besides any gays, blacks, whites and anybody else that fought. by the way, if you have never served, there is a bond between those that did, regardless of what the movies say.