You're idiots.
You know, this is one thing I don't get. It's childish and lame. It only says that you've no other recourse, that you're so desperate, that you'll trespass and steal signs.
It also says, in the case of Proposition 8, you're just as prejudiced as you claim the "yes" crowd is. It says you're scared. It says you have the same lack of respect as you claim you or your friends are victim of.
Just like you have your right to freedom of speech, so do those who don't agree with you. It's one of the lovely things about living where we do.
I have every faith that what is supposed to happen, will happen. What you think should happen may not, but truth always prevails in the end. Sometimes it takes time, sometimes it doesn't, but truth always prevails.
Trust in that. Be the bigger person. Let's not resort to name calling, sign snatching, etc. It says more about us than it does about them.
As for the question as to how I think this will affect churches should Proposition 8 fail, I imagine graffiti and other hate crimes would be happening now. It's no secret that many Christian churches are very much against this proposition. What's stopping the backlash now?
It's just sign stealing, and I don't mean to say that as if to brush it aside. What I am saying is that the law is on the side of the anti-8 crowd, and if they wanted to do something worse they would now.
As far as I can tell, that hasn't happened yet. We're allowed to believe as we will. We're allowed to disagree. If someone feels the need to violently attack anyone who is against gay marriage, the law will undoubtedly be on the side of the attacked.
There will always be those who feel they have to resort to baser methods to prove a point.
On an ironic note, I just noticed two of our pumpkins were stolen overnight. Mmph.
Anyway, listen: the Church's stance on gay marriage is no secret. It's only expected that they would feel the need to take an official stance on this proposition. Everyone wants to think they'll be a victim of their beliefs. Let's not forget, though, that signs are stolen in every election.
Did anything happen after Proposition 22 passed back in 2000? For those unfamiliar with California politics, Proposition 22 called for the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman. The California Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional and overturned it this past May 15th. Proposition 8 calls for an amendment to make Proposition 22 constitutional.
Seriously though - did anything happen? I don't remember anything earth shattering happening. This kind of thing, the sign snatching, happens every election year.
I mean, somebody felt it necessary to remove half of our Obama '08 sticker on one of our cars in the last few months. Classy, right?
I actually laughed. We live in one of, if not the, most conservative county in the state. As far as I can tell, we're the only ones with an Obama anything.
It's no more personal than it has been in the past. I'd be rather surprised - and dismayed, don't get me wrong - if these kinds of actions continued and escalated after November 4th.
I really think we're all better than that.
20 Years of FMH
2 months ago
25 comments:
My thoughts are - the anti-8 people already feel like homosexuals are entitled to marriage, and they aren't attacking/graffiti-ing churches now. Who's to say they'll start if prop 8 passes?
I don't agree with anyone who uses these tactics to get their point across. It's wrong, and it's a violation. I wish they wouldn't do it. Sorry to hear your pumpkins got stolen.
Exactly.
And I'm sorry too. Damn pumpkin snatchers :P Maybe it's because of our Obama sticker, haha.
I think the person who took half the sticker off the car was mortally confused... I mean, with the Bush sticker there too... lol Keep your pumpkins inside!! I know, they're supposed to be on the porch but now-a-days you just never can tell.
I love hearing the news about people having their signs stolen. Inevitably you get some indignant ass who goes ape because someone stole his sign from his yard. Never mind that half the neighborhood experienced the same thing and are dutifully replacing their signs from the large cache in their garages... Oh no, this one guy has to act as though he were personally attacked... I love it.
Sign stealing sends the wrong message and is counter-productive. I can empathize -- it feels like a tiny sock to the stomach when you see one. But that doesn't change the fact that theft is wrong. Or that stealing signs will actually backfire.
FWIW, I have also read reports of No on 8 signs being stolen.
Doesn't surprise me at all.
Sometimes it seems that's the only way people think they can get involved.
wow, I have read most of your posts, I think you have totally missed the true message and meaning about the gospel. I hope those who are wondering about the LDS church do not get their views from your blog. I understand you have your personal opinions... but also I hope you understand that when you say you are a liberal Mormon you are going against the main message we are taught. I think you have justified yourself to believing what is worldly popularized, NOT what the gospel and our savior has taught.
aw, Proud, don't be like that.
Nothing in the Church states that we must be Conservative in order to be righteous. Nothing.
I'm only saying that we should step back and realize that there really is no logical reason to vote for Prop 8. Like an active member in our church states in his blog, Soy Made Me Gay, "I know not, save the Lord commanded me" should suffice.
Why doesn't it seem to? That's my biggest problem here. There's always someone trying to rationalize Prop 8, and beyond relgious reasons, they're unable to. We don't live in a theocracy, and I'm sure you would hate for someone to shove their beliefs down your throat.
That's where I'm at. That's all.
I understand where your at, You are correct, no where does it say you can't be a liberal. But liberals do not follow all the morals and beliefs we as members are taught. Of course we as LDS have our right to have our opinions. Recently I went through a devastating family emergency so my priorities and views are more eternal. If our savior taught that marraige is between a man and a woman do you think that he will change his mind in the millenium? Of course not.
You say this prop won't affect anything. Then what if this doesn't pass, what next. It shows people who have our morals and beliefs are not strong enough to vote against same sex marriage, I don't know about you but I do not want my children being taught things that are against the morals we teach in our home. If this prop passes our children will be taught that same sex marriage is the same as straight marriage, and it is not.
I want to make sure you know this is not ANGER MAIL or anything of that sort. You have a personal blog and these are your views, I just want others who read this to know that this is not how most members of the mormon church feel or support. We should want to be missionary like and share the happiness we have that comes from the gospel with others, not shove it down there throats but lead by example. Blog on sister in blogville.
I know conservatives who don't follow all the morals and beliefs we are taught.
I don't think it's a matter of who we are personally, but a difference in how we think the government should work. It might also interest you to know I'm neither a registered democrat OR republican. I have conservative views as well as some liberal ones.
The fact here is that I'm not running out to get hitched with another chick or anything.
I am the only member in a very conservative family. I considered myself conservative for *years* before realizing it didn't mesh with my views on how we should govern people. "Teach them the correct principles, let them govern themselves..."
God doesn't necessarily change His mind, but things have changed for reasons we're not always aware of. Blacks and the priesthood? I'm not saying God is suddenly going to decide gay marriage is okie-doke with him, but this isn't an in-house election. This is between many religions or lack thereof. This is between millions of Californians.
Look, I can see how some may see this as condoning sin. I get that. I get why the Church is taking an official stance here. But how would you feel (as perhaps your ancestors did) when the government came and told them that polygamy was a sin, was wrong?
Would you have been okay with that?
The fact is that the schools are going to teach about sex. I don't know if they do now, but some kid will probably ask in class "how do gay people 'do it'?" and the question will be answered. Correctly.
Will this mean the schools will put the stamp of approval on gay sex/marriage? Nah. They just teach what is.
YOU can tell your child later, "Yes, but this is what the Scriptures say and what the Prophet has said on the matter..." and if your child "comes out" later, you can show your love for him/her and help them deal with what have to be absolutely terrifying feelings given the culture he or she will be brought up in (I can't imagine trying to reconcile all of that).
You matter more than the world to your children. Your influence is astronomical, larger than you may realize.
If they don't learn it from their teachers, they will learn it from their friends. Ultimately, they should learn family and religious morals from you.
(btw, I really do enjoy this debate. Thanks for coming back. You've been really cool. You're welcome here.)
This is between Californians and Arizonians. This WILL effect the future of how church adoption agencies will work. We have adopted through LDS services and now if this prop passes it may have to discontinue its services. There could be lawsuits to the church not allowing same sex couples to be married in the temple....seriously this doesn't faze you at all?
I personally don't want my children learning from a teacher who may or may not share my same morals and beliefs. I certainly do NOT want my kindergartner coming home and showing me a book he got on how some children have 2 mommies or 2 daddies. When the time comes(we are not naive so it will be sooner that later) we will sit down and discuss with them about homosexuality. We will share and teach what we believe, we will prepare them for what the world teaches-which media right now disgusts me! And then when they are older, hope and pray they will make those same opinions for themselves.
I disagree that it doesn't matter who we are personally....we don't get to be one way at church and another at home, and another with politics. That seems fake to me.
For blacks receiving the priesthood was amazing! Now I don't consider black people and gay people the same. MY opinion is being gay is a choice, being black is not.
As polygamy goes, it was a period of time and then the church was asked not to. The members agreed and the righteous moved on. It's about obedience. It's about having faith that what the prophet asks us to do is right. We may not agree, but we choose to be obedient. What do we gain by being disobedient? Some self pride, a high five for ourselves? the feeling of being "my own person"?? How long does that last. Not very long.
I want my eternal family, I want to be with my husband and children forever. I want to see the children I have lost when I pass. I will do everything I can on earth to be righteous so I can live with them!! Why should I go with worldly politics and worldly sin when that won't bring me personally closer to my savior?
I do think you are promoting sinful behavior, but are you a bad person, NO of course not! Do I think homosexuals are bad people, NO! I whole heartily disagree with that lifestyle though! I would never condone it.
I too enjoy this debate:) We are both active latter day saints, I am sure you also want your family to be together for eternity, I look at this election as the beginning of what can be to come as far as government and religion. And that I am passionate about. What are your thoughts on "In God We Trust" being taken off the money? They pray in the senate? Why not in schools anymore??
If anyone is going to sue the Church for discrimination for not being allowed to marry in the temple, they would have already. Always remember, too: people can sue all they want. I highly doubt they will ever win in this case for these reasons:
1. We don't allow non-members, gay or straight, to marry in the temple.
2. We don't allow LDS members without a temple recommend to marry in the temple.
3. No one is getting paid to perform these services - if they were, we might have a problem. But we don't. Lay clergy.
4. The temple is a private building.
The adoption thing is probably already in force since California has an anti-discrimination clause in its Social Services contract (it's what happened with Catholic Charities in MA: they signed a contract w/the state, and had to abide by state law.) This is something separate we'd have to fight. Not all states have that clause, though. In Debunking Gay Marriage Myths you can find out more about this issue.
I wasn't talking about being one way at home and another at church. I meant our political leanings are more how we think the government should work than about who we are personally. Government and church are separate entities.
You may also be interested in reading California's Proposition 8
As far as homosexuality being a choice, I believe you'll find the Church no longer agrees with that (at least not in every instance). A friend of mine, very very very active young man came out to me after we graduated high school. Right after I joined the church. He said he was tired of fighting, tired of feeling the way he was. He couldn't change it. He tried. He *chose* to have a girlfriend. It didn't work.
Of course there are always people like Clint, active gay members of the Church. You can read about him at Soy Made Me Gay
I don't think I'm promoting sinful behavior. I'm not telling people to go out act out on homosexual thoughts/tendencies.
As for the other stuff, I think my response is long enough. I can save those issues for another time, probably after the election.
You might be surprised.
I think I came across as ignorant, which I am not. As for your friend, I can't imagine the hardship of those feelings. Is he active still because he does not act on it? I'm interested to learn more on that, I will respectfully read his blog. Will I ever hate someone for their choice of being gay, NEVER! But I will never agree with it.
I received a letter saying something to the fact that the church having to allow marraiges-not sealings-in the temple, they would never win but just the fact that this is what its coming too. Their are plenty of adoption services that will place with same sex couples(which is another issue I have a prob with) why are they trying to close agencies that choose not to. Maybe I need to read up on it more, but that will not change the way I will vote, or change the way I feel.
That was harsh about saying you promote sinful behavior, your right your not telling them to or not to act. We just disagree on where we stand on that. I am very passionate on the other end of that spectrum.
ok I just read prop.8. If it does not pass there will be no definition for marriage and will leave it open ended for same sex marriage to be in the constitution. The Lord intended for marriage to be between a man and a woman, and seeing how our nation was created 'under God' It would be a violation of our nation's law and God's law to go do anything otherwise. If this prop does not pass it will lead to so much more... don't you see that?
until tommorow....
I had to comment real quick on your friend clint's blog, WOW I had no idea. That is amazing, I got chills at his testimony and choices he is making.
Well well well......
A very intriguing discussion from Lisa and Proud Mommy! I'm SarahLynn, a member, I don't claim a certain party (but mostly liberal and for Obama), and I am passionate about Yes on Prop 8. First off, I agree with Lisa about the sign stealing. It's juvenile and takes away others' freedom of speech. Like Tom mentioned, though, it's happening on both sides. :-(
I'm pretty positive the church has never made a statement on what causes homosexuality and probably never will, but like Lisa mentioned, the Church has made it clear that it is considered a serious sin. I wondered if either Lisa or Proud Mommy have read The Divine Institution of Marriage found at newsroom.lds.org. It is the Church's formal response to prop 8 and addresses all the arguments on the issue. Also, preservingmarriage.org is a website about Prop 8 made by the church.
I think that blacks getting the preisthood and polygomy are entirely different subjects, as neither were issues about sinful behavior and thus cannot be compared with Prop 8 (yes polygomy is a sin for those not approved by heavenly father, which status quo is everyone).
Lisa, you say there is no logical reason to vote for prop 8. Why?
You said in your post that whatever is supposed to happen will happen. I believe that, too. But that does not mean that everything that is supposed to happen is good or okay with Heavenly Father. Although wickedness will prevail in the last days, these future events cannot be a justification for us to allow sin to prevail in our communities.
God inspired our founding fathers to give us a voice so that we can vote to preserve righteousness. I feel that not voting yes on prop 8, esp as a member, would be doing exactly what the Nephites did prior to the Savior's visit to the Americas. They allowed all manner of iniquity to prevail, and they definitely paid for it. Like Proud Mommy and the Church has been saying, we can be loving toward all people, but that does not mean that we should sit back and allow society to condone all behaviors.
Today tolerance has a much different meaning than what Christ taught. Tolerance as a gospel principle is to have love and forgiveness for everyone, not to condone sinful living. To me, a NO vote on prop 8 would condone sinful living.
Like I told Tom, I respect people's right to be gay, but I do not think they have a right to be married because one of the main purposes of marriage is to procreate.
I've spent a *lot* of time over the last few months pouring over the many reasons given for Prop 8 being a bad idea - all of the secular reasons.
I'll tell you, for every single one of them I've found the arguments were frail or just plain wrong. In their contexts, you'd be surprised what you might find. If you want to see what I've discussed, go back in my archives and check out California's Proposition 8, an article I wrote after receiving an email *full* of false information.
No, not everything that is supposed to or will happen is good, but...well, no I take that back. Everything is under control, you know?
Anyway. I think the only real argument for Prop 8 is a religious one, and that's where it gets hairy for many, many, many people: especially those who aren't religious or have religious beliefs that don't jive with ours. We need to understand and respect that. We can't scream "because God said so!" at athiests or those of other beliefs and expect it to be enough.
This, here, is a religious proposition, and really also for those who can't get over balking at gay people. Once we accept that, I think a lot of people will respect it. Not everyone, but let's be honest here: there's no real reason for this besides a religious one.
I'd respect that and be more apt to leave this alone if people would just be honest about it and quit making up scary reasons about what will happen if this thing fails.
Thanks for coming by :)
and yes, I have read the official LDS statement a few times.
:)
I've read a lot of things from both sides.
and polygamy...i mean, for everyone else that was considered a sin. In fact, the Republican party equated it with slavery (see Utah History to Go: Struggle for Statehood)
It really depends on who you are, you see? For some people, gay marriage is not a sinful thing. It's a beautiful thing. The only right thing.
And...well, dangit, polygamy is a whooooooole other post that I may or may not get into.
I have read the lds statement and loved it, Lisa I am sorry you missed the trueness of it. I love what it says about tolerance. We in this world right now who do not tolerate the sin are seen as not tolerating the sinner, which as I said I love people, I wont condone or tolerate the sin.
I feel so strongly that the first presidency has asked all members to do what they can to help these prop's pass. Do you feel right about going against what the first presidency has asked. Also what I said before it is about obedience.
Lisa-you said the only reason you can find is religious...HELLO! seriously, what better reason as latter day saints is there??? I think you have accepted the sin to been seen as tolerant. That is exactly what we have been asked not to do. You should love all people, its about love and forgiveness, not condoning. We can love homosexual friends or family members without accepting their lifestyle or any re-definition of marriage.
saralynn-I agree and enjoyed reading your post.
"that does not mean that we should sit back and allow society to condone all behaviors."
Here's the thing -- the behavior being condoned here is...marriage. That's a POSITIVE behavior. No matter what you think about same-sex couples, I think you have to agree that it's more likely ANY couple will be more faithful, stable, caring, etc. if one takes on the responsibilities and commitments of civil marriage.
If you were worried about society condoning homosexual behavior, your chance passed on that more than five years ago. In 2003, the US Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that "the intimate, adult consensual conduct at issue here was part of the liberty protected by the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protections."
That basically struck down sodomy laws. We were no longer criminals. (Of course, given the rather broad definition of "sodomy" in those laws, I'd hazard a guess most straight couples were guilty, as well.)
THAT's when society officially "condoned" homosexual behavior -- when the Supreme Court said it's private, it's no one else's business, that there was no rational state interest in outlawing it.
That upset a lot of people. Especially a lot of religious people, who certainly felt society was condoning what they saw as grave sin. "God says it's wrong" doesn't fly at the Supreme Court.
The right we are fighting to maintain now is not about sexual liberty -- as the Lawrence decision could be interpreted -- it's about what we DO with our liberty. What we want to do -- what I DID on Monday -- is to commit ourselves to mutual care and affection with another person. Some of us are having and/or raising children, most of us are not. Most straight couples are having and/or raising children, but some are not.
I agree that marriage should be supported because it's the foundation from which the next generation of humanity can be most effectively built. The stability marriage brings is good for children. But even if you think two men or two women make less effective parents -- sometimes two men or two women ARE parents. And isn't it better for their children if the people raising them are legally committed to each other?
We're not asking for society to condone a negative behavior, we're asking for society to let us have the option to engage in a POSITIVE behavior. Let us continue to commit to each other. Let us continue to promise to care for each other, even when things look bleak.
Any bad (to some) behavior has already been "condoned" -- why would anyone want to take away an encouragement to positive behavior?
So much can be said here. So much. Tom touched on a lot of it there.
Voting for something that only has religious backing doesn't fly with most people because, again, we do not live in a theocracy.
More than Christians live in this state, in this country, in this world. We can't be pushing our views onto other people because we wouldn't want that should the shoe be on the other foot. Lets be careful about what we push - and I understand many think "well, the Church never gets involved in politics, so this illustrates just how important this issue is."
Nothing like this has really come up, though. I GET IT. I know why the church is involved. I get that the family is the central, basic, fundamental unit. I agree that a child needs both a father and a mother.
But life doesn't always work out the way we think it should. Life isn't always black and white. There's one hell of a gray area.
Marriage promotes celibate behavior - no premarital sex, etc. Promotes stability. It's unrealistic to tell gay people, people who want to do what is right (according to what they believe): "Premarital sex is wrong...and you can't get married."
Would you want to live like that?
I see where Tom is coming from. Surely you can, too. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Not everyone feels what they are doing is wrong, and I've come to a point in my life where I know there is right and wrong, but to almost every rule there is an exception.
Be good to me now for saying that.
What bothers me is that the people in the church (in the entire coalition) continue to perpetuate half-truths. That people, smart people, are allowing themselves to believe it. That they feel the need to *justify* and qualify revelation. Don't you see what smells bad about that? I see a lot of homophobia in the church as well, and I wonder if those people are using this as a way to validate their prejudices.
Again, I know what the church has said. I've read it. But people are really getting up on their high horse for this, and it's irritating. Hardly Christlike.
ONE of the main purposes of marriage is procreation. Not every couple procreates, though. Some adopt. Some choose not to raise children, and that should be okay. In fact, I'd prefer some couples didn't. I've got a stepsister who I honestly think should get "fixed." I'll be bringing that up later. Some people just should not be parents.
On a slightly related note: A hypothetical but completely realistic situation regarding the adoption of children:
If it was between an unhealthy heterosexual marriage: two people who are unstable, unhappy, and hateful (but hey, man and a woman) and two men or two women who are happy, stable, loving...who would you rather place the children with?
Even the Catholic Charities of Boston knew better. The Vatican stepped in, however, and said "no."
Really. I provided the links in earlier posts.
Listen, I've never been told how to vote before. It goes against everything in me, everything I've ever been taught. I've never been one to blindly follow. I've also never really been much of a rebel. I'm a good girl. I do what I'm told. This hasn't set right with me for quite some time, though, and I had to stop and ask just what it was we were being asked to vote on. Surely you can see my problem.
And lest I repeat myself (again), I'm not asking for a "no" vote and I'm not trying to dissuade from a "yes" vote. I'm just irritated at all the falsehoods being thrown around.
I am not the only one who is having issues with this either, and it really needs to be respected. It's difficult to reconcile.
I just want people to understand, to know what they're doing. Follow the Prophet - awesome. Understand why some people are questioning it, though. Understand that some have prayed about it and received their own answers. You can't question that. God works in mysterious ways, and I don't think this is a "lead the church astray" kind of issue. I see this more as a "Listen, this is of eternal importance and we have to emphasize that. Get that message across."
Questioning should be okay, though. Talking about it is good, and I'm really grateful no one here has judged anyone or questioned worthiness. Thank you for that.
Have faith in me; have faith in good people.
I appreciate everyone's thoughts and concerns. I'm considering one more post on the issue and leaving it at that. We'll see though.
ok, I am sorry, I totally disagree and I feel that I won't grow or learn from anything that you have said. You contradict yourself a lot. You say you understand one way but then say you feel the opposite. You have your opinion and feel strongly about it and I as well feel strongly. I respect people, I have faith in good people. I also have hope that the good will prevail. I see this issue as wrong, thoroughly wrong. I am my own person, I am a faithful member of the church, I follow the words and counsel of our true prophet. Many may think us mormons don't have minds of our own, but OH WE DO! I have made my own choice to be obedient, I can question and at times disagree(not on this issue), but I WILL be obedient. Don't you think it is really important that if the church steps in to a political matter that it is important??
It is ok to question, but there is a line and if you cross it it can lead you off the path, it can be harmful to your testimony.
I don't like the feeling I get when I read your reasoning, especially about shoving our faith into others throats. That is not what we want to do. We should be missionaries and share our testimony's on how wonderful our life is with the gospel in it. If I were a nonmember reading your blog I would question why you are still a member when you disagree so fervently on our most important standing-the family. I have yet to read a positive on how you feel about our church. I haven't read ALL your posts so correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not trying to be mean with that, I wonder though...
I have never been one to stand on my high horse, or be self righteous, I am standing up for what I believe. How is it that if I am against same sex marriage that I am on a high horse and those who are for it are Not?? don't know....
or that having such a strong testimony and believes in such morals that have been supported since biblical times be intolerant or cruel. Or just because the world has become much more liberal and those with christian morals are the bad guys....that is not how the lord intended it to be, so I will not let my morals and beliefs bend so I am viewed as tolerant by this worlds standards.
Proud Mommy seems very concerned about what non-member readers are thinking. I just want to send a message to them as well:
Not all Mormons are like Proud Mommy, either.
This is because we are not the cult-ish group of brain-washed individuals so many Evangelicals make us out to be. :) Ta-da!
As as President Faust could have exemplified, it is very possible be a righteous Saint and a liberal/Democrat. Yay for diversity!
oooh nonononono, Proud. No.
I said some. I never said *you* were on your high horse.
Just some people get on it.
Some people are jerks about this and other things.
Some.
Not all.
I just think it's okay to question. I think it's healthy. I mean, I questioned a *lot* when I was investigating - why is it suddenly not ok for me to question?
A rhetorical question, btw.
btw, I've been a member for near a decade. I'm not new at this :)
Post a Comment