Dear Mormons, you’ve been given a rare second chance – don’t blow it

The Mormons have been given that rare second chance.

wife-1-x

After murdering love in California back in 2008, by singlehandedly saving Proposition 8 with a $20 million influx of Mormon cash, thus guaranteeing that millions of gays, statewide, would lose one of their most basic civil rights – the right to marry – the Mormons earned a well-deserved reputation as hateful, intolerant bullies.

wife-2-x

And it seemed to actually bother them, this new-found visceral loathing that growing segments of America were developing for anything “Mormon.”  Joe had written before about seeing Mormon missionaries on the street, and being just barely able to control the urge to yell at them.  I’ve had the same experience. Where I once felt indifference mixed with curiosity towards all things Mormon, now I know better through experience, and feel seething contempt.

Brigham Young's 10th wife.

Brigham Young’s 10th wife.

But then a funny thing happened. A Christmas miracle, of sorts. And the Mormons were given that second chance that so few rarely get. They were given the chance to undo the damage of California in their own backyard as a federal judge struck down Utah’s gay marriage ban, effectively legalizing same-sex weddings in the state.

Brigham Young's 15th wife.

Brigham Young’s 15th wife.

And the GOP/Mormon machine that runs Utah stepped into action, pulling out all stops to kill love once again.

Brigham Young's 20th wife.

Brigham Young’s 20th wife.

Rather than go through all the machinations by Utah’s GOP/Mormon’s governor, I’d like to rather focus on a series of editorials from the Mormon-owned newspaper, Deseret News.  First there was their editorial following the federal court ruling:

The essence of judicial tyranny is when a single, unelected federal judge declares the laws and constitution of an entire state null and void with an opinion clothed in the barest of legal precedent. It is true that state efforts to restrict marriage on the basis of race have run afoul of the federal constitutional protections against racial discrimination. But as we scour the legal landscape, we find no 10th Circuit or Supreme Court precedent that prevents Utah from adhering to a traditional definition of marriage. Nonetheless, Judge Shelby’s blithe mix-and-match approach to legal argumentation has, for the time being, created a new class of same-gender applicants deemed “married” under the Utah Constitution.

Oh the GOP talking points do run amuck. “Judicial tyranny,” the phrase most loved by a bigot. How dare the state not let me oppress my fellow man?

It’s ironic, of course, that Mormons, who have a history of being oppressed (and outright slaughtered – though they also enjoyed a good slaughter at their own hands) themselves, are now so enamored with the art of the slaughter. What the Mormons wouldn’t have given for a little judicial tyranny protecting their own people once upon a time. But no more. The Mormons are modern-day Amurikans now, and they can oppress and hate just as well as the next guy. In fact, they see hate as their civic duty.

Brigham Young's 25th wife.

Brigham Young’s 25th wife.

And let’s not even get into the risibility of Mormons lecturing the rest of us about the “traditional definition of marriage.” A definition they and their still-revered leaders didn’t traditionally even adhere to.

Brigham Young's 32nd wife.

Brigham Young’s 32nd wife.

Joseph Smith, the Mormon founder, had 34 wives. And a third of those women were married to other men at the same time they were married to Smith.

Brigham Young's 39th wife.

Brigham Young’s 39th wife.

Brigham Young, another key leader among Mormons, had 55 wives. So spare us the lies about the Mormon adherence to “traditional marriage.”

Brigham Young's 45th wife.

Brigham Young’s 45th wife.

Traditionally, Mormons were serial polygamists who had zero respect for any traditional view of marriage, whatever that even means, since marriage in America was traditionally a property relationship exclusively between two people of the same race.

Brigham Young's 49th wife.

Brigham Young’s 49th wife.

Not to be outdone, the Mormon-run Deseret News weighed in yesterday with yet another hate-filled editorial. Let’s share a bit of that, shall we:

But self-governance rests on more than just the outcome of votes or court orders. It relies on a deeply embedded culture of civility, thoughtful participation in public decision-making, faithful adherence to legal process and visionary leadership. None of those was swept away on Friday by federal court order.

wife-51

Brigham Young’s 51st wife.

As the fate of Amendment 3 moves forward through the appellate process, we acknowledge that there are people of good will on both sides of this contentious issue, and we appreciate that Utah’s culture of civility and respect will continue to guide how this issue is engaged. The spirit of can-do volunteerism and community spirit that unite our state must prevail through this difficult conversation.

Ah yes, the gay-basher’s universal call for “civility” as they’re beating the bejesus out of us. “Can’t we all just act like gentleman, while I tear apart your family and kick the crap out of your civil rights?” One wonders whether the lynch mob that assassinated Joseph Smith issued a call for civility as they repeatedly shot him in the back.

Here’s a bit more from Deseret:

Utah’s Amendment 3 may provide precisely the robust legal case that will, in the end, preserve to the states their right to define marriage to be exclusively between and man and a woman….

wife-52

Brigham Young’s 52nd wife.

[Utah Gov.] Herbert and [Attorney General Sean] Reyes, however, have both the opportunity and the willingness to take a full and vigorous legal fight forward. Building on the extraordinary social and economic results that we believe stems from Utah’s deep-seated support of the traditional family, Herbert and Reyes can shape a full-vetting of the complex issues involved in this vitally important debate in both the courts and in the court of public opinion. The vision, tone and rigor that they bring to this debate will provide much needed leadership, not just for Utah, but for the nation.

Right, because that’s what Utah, and the Mormons – and their already black-and-blue reputation – need right now. To provide leadership to America’s homophobes, and to be personally responsible for killing love nationwide.  Good luck with that.

brigham-young-55th-wife


(I’m told that in order to better see my Facebook posts in your feed, you need to “follow” me.)


Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Google+. John Aravosis is the editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown (1989); and worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, and as a stringer for the Economist. Frequent TV pundit: O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline & Reliable Sources. Bio, .

Share This Post

  • Chr477

    And….they squandered it.

  • TWISTED SISTER

    Utah. Where we will spend 10s of Millions in court cases defending unconstitutional laws, that get passed by the legislature, and are no brainers (at least for anyone that has a functional brain). All of their attorney Brothers collecting hundreds of thousands for their efforts that are plain futile. (Unless of coarse they need a boost in their private election funds)
    All this money spent while our students get the pitiful amount known for being the least in our 50 states. We used to be ahead of Mississippi, but not any more.
    The media, it seems, is there only to stir the bucket to keep the public distracted so no one can see what else is going on.
    In Utah it seems that we have government for, The Wealthy Legislators for The Wealthy Legislators and their Brothers and Friends.
    OR just another day in Utah.
    Now everybody get back to work so we can pay the taxes to make this game possible!

  • malibujd44

    I soooo believe in KARMA and KARMA is exactly what they got and deserved.

  • UncleBucky

    I have done 13 already today.

    And once you dead-baptize a Mormon gay.
    S/he stays that way.

    Thank you, I’ll be here all day.

  • Hal

    Chris, I look at the subject of same-sex marriage like this. You can be on the side of kindness, or you can be on the side of cruelty. You get one life, and it’s over remarkably fast. Your choices count. Maybe at the end they are examined by a God, or maybe it’s just your (gay, married) grandchildren that try to figure out what you did and why.

  • cantake8

    It looks like “Straight Only” is going the same route as “White Only.” Some people aren’t going to like it and the rest of the nation looks at them like the idiots they are.

  • cantake8

    It’s a new joke to me and HILARIOUS!

  • Inis_Magrath

    Actually, John, I very much hope that the governor and AG of Utah does put up a “full and vigorous legal fight” against the district court decision.We don’t need another Prop 8 Supreme Court decision tossing the appeal on account of lack of standing. We need the SCOTUS to be able to reach a full decision on the merits so they can finally rule unconstitutional all laws depriving LGBT people of their right to marriage. The only way we’ll get that is if some valid defendant, such as Utah, puts up a full and vigorous legal fight. I say to Utah, fight on! Then go to the Supreme Court and dramatically and completely lose!

  • http://poodyheads.wordpress.com/ zorbear

    Maybe if you wore that shield that Spock wore in the “Is there no truth in beauty?” episode to keep from going insane when looking at the alien?
    :-P

  • KingCranky

    Apparently what’s “too much to ask” is how same sex marriage physically harms heterosexual marriages, since that question hasn’t been answered by either yourself or the Mormon church.

    Replying without providing a logical answer, bearing out actual physical harm to heterosexual marriage from same sex marriages, only further proves that point, there’s no actual harm done.

  • pappyvet

    In their tiny minds we are not. Works for me. ;]

  • BlueIdaho

    My partner and I have lived in Idaho for 4 years and have never been visited by the cute Mormon boys that we see walking the neighborhood. We are beginning to wonder if we have a big red X over our door.

  • BlueIdaho

    Here in Idaho, we call those “hit and runs”…and man can they run! :)

  • UncleBucky

    Hahaha, I almost tromped on you, and then I edited to what you said here. Hahaha! Same thing here for me, too.

    Gee, I don’t understand Mormons and how they can evade clear and ethical thinking in light of their brainwashing!

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    That was the part that I found so funny. It hasn’t provided a “robust legal case” so far — in fact, it hasn’t provided a case at all.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    I think ;you’ve missed the point that I and some others have been making (and granted, our comments may have been lost in the welter of responses vilifying your church; all I can suggest is that you try to ignore those commenters and not respond to them — they contribute nothing to the discussion), which is simply that the LDS Church, like any other church, is free to form its own doctrines on marriage and sexual morality. It is not free to impose those doctrines on the rest of us by writing them into civil law. This country is governed by the Constitution, not the Book of Mormon, or the Bible, or any other religious text. The LDS’s justifications of its interference in the exercise of fundamental rights by gay and lesbian citizens of California, for example, ring hollow: I’m not Mormon; why, therefore, should I live under the rules of the LDS Church? Yes, I did follow the links. Now I know what the LDS Church’s position is on marriage, and I’m afraid my reaction is, So what?

    There are strict limits on the involvement of churches in politics, which, sadly, are almost never enforced. (There are documented instances of both the Archbishop of Boston and the Archbishop of Chicago calling legislators to lobby against gay-inclusive civil rights bills and marriage equality bills, which is over the line. Nothing was done, although complaints were filed.) For the LDS Church to funnel $20 million into an effort to strip citizens of a fundamental right should be over the line, although strictly speaking, it’s not — churches are allowed issue advocacy. The morality of that particular exercise, however, is open to question.

    Which leads to the right to express opinions. No one is arguing that (at least, no one who is paying attention to the issues in this thread). There are, however, always consequences: no one has the right to avoid criticism of his opinions. That’s the free marketplace of ideas in action: opinions stand or fall on the basis of their acceptance by the public at large. (And sometimes the rejection can be rather nasty. That’s why it takes a thick skin to live in a democracy.) In this case, Americans being basically decent people, opinions against the rights of gay and lesbian citizens, including the right to marriage, are falling.

    My ultimate question is: How can anyone who calls himself an American believe he has the right to impose his religious beliefs on the entire population through the force of civil law? The key point is that it’s not a matter of the substance of those beliefs, but the mere fact of trying to establish them as the law of the land.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    Good point. I’ve come to the conclusion that “morality” has nothing to do with expecting others to live by rules one picks and chooses from one’s religious texts — it starts with empathy, compassion, and generosity and goes on from there.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    Sorry — the replies are coming thick and fast, and I’ve been away from the computer (a rare occurrence indeed). In my case, “we” are the LGBT community (or communities — sometimes it’s hard to figure which).

  • charles rivera

    Do tell, in your own words, why some Mormons oppose same sex marriage? And because Mormons are the “saviors of the Constitution which will hang by a thread”,please explain how your opposition to same sex marriage is constitutional or not.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    The Mormon position of “protecting marriage” strongly resembles the Jim
    Crow south, where drinking fountains, bathrooms and restaurants used by
    Whites were kept “pure” by barring non-whites.

    You mean like their version of Heaven is said to be? According to Mormon doctrine, people of color aren’t allowed in the best parts, y’know.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    I don’t think I could bear it Z.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    yep

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    “Sorry, didn’t know I was on a time limit.” Your fifteen minutes of fame are up sweet-pea.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Historically, Mormonism is considered one of the most spectacular frauds of the 20th century. In another fifteen hundred years it may outshine the RCC.

  • silas1898

    Thanks. Happy New Year to all!

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    “You sound like an intelligent guy.” Now, that is a legitimate subject for debate.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    I can just imagine you typing out that smarmy bit with a smiley face.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    And tell the cute one his zipper is undone.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Much better, I agree.

  • cantake8

    And some scientists were jailed or executed for defying the church.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    The sad part is, scientific discovery in the pre-Christian era was quite remarkable. Educated people knew where the Sun went at night, they knew the Earth was round, they made incredible engineering feats, and traveled great distances. Of course, there were still religions trying to scare people and keep them controllable, but when Christianity swept across the civilized world we fell into a period often referred to as the Dark Ages.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Okay, so why doesn’t the church allow incestuous marriage and polygamy? Those things are clearly acceptable in the Bible. Why don’t we stone people to death anymore? Why don’t we have slavery? All these things are condoned, even encouraged, in the Bible. One thing I’ve never seen in the Bible is the part where it says that you get to pick and choose which of the rules you get to follow. One of the things to always remain the same about religion is that they just make it up as they go along. Well, it’s time to morph again. You can either get on board, or get left behind. History has shown the Mormons to prefer to get on board, because it’s more profitable.

  • Bomer

    ^_^

  • Whitewitch

    Good one silas! Happy New Year!

  • Bomer

    No one is stopping you from believing what you want. What we want is for you to stop trying to make us live according to your beliefs. Or, in other words, keep your religion out of our secular laws. You can play the martyr all you want but no one is buying your schtick.

  • silas1898

    Old joke: How do you stop a Mormon from drinking all of your beer? Invite 2 Mormons.

  • silas1898

    I understand your “religion” and I fully disagree with it. In the mid-70s, I attended a Mormon Devotional Service at the local LDS church.
    We were told it was a “wedding” that non-morman friends of the happy couple could attend. The real marriage was the sealing of the souls for eternity ceremony in the big temple in a few weeks.
    Non-Mormons were not allowed for that.
    After your quickie Christian-ish ceremony, The I promise, the I do’s. We all know the drill. It rapidly devolved into a multi-media recruiting presentation. Slides of happy couples and the tabernacle, then the film of Leni Riefenstahl esque aerial views of Utah. With the choir singing, of course.
    I was only 16 and uncomfortable, as seemed many of the other 40 odd people there, my parents included. After much bla, bla, bla, they got to the point.
    Some of you Christians may get into heaven, but we Mormons will be running the place. For God, of course. So you better join us and you can be a boss in heaven, too.
    They also suggested that you could then baptize your dead relatives and, if they had made it into heaven, they would get something like a “promotion”.
    Creepy and weird.
    Then we had bad white sheet cake and lemonade. Gifts were cheerfully accepted. This all occurred in NW New Jersey.
    To top this all off, the guy is now out and proud, but somehow claims to still be Mormon. A family member found his Facebook page.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Oh yeah!

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    “God loves each of us– gay, straight, sinner, saint.” My dear, there is no god. Didn’t you read that article in Archeological Digest about the inscription found in Jerusalem which stated that Christmas had to be called off because the birth was a miscarriage.

  • cantake8

    It was a jock strap the last time.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Wearing a thong for Jesus—-great idea C :-)

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Way to go Becca! If only Missy Mormon had stuck around to know she got her ass kicked big time.

  • Whitewitch

    No…yucky ….no more mormons as gays…they spoil the whole party.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    I think the tide is finally turning, because millions of us are baptizing dead Mormons into gays.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Again, I hear calls for tolerance. Fine, we’ll be tolerant of your religious beliefs, as long as they stay in the church.

    But they haven’t stayed there, have they? There was a concerted effort on the part of the LDS to deny people the right to marry, based on religious teachings.

    Do you not understand the concept of the separation of church and state? You are entitled to believe what you want (even if it baffles me). You are not entitled to make those beliefs laws. You are not entitled to deprive people of civil rights because those rights are believed to be at odds with your religion.

    You say that you are not asking me to believe in your religion. When you try and codify your beliefs into law, that’s exactly what you are asking – in fact, demanding.

    Again, you are ignoring the issue at hand – civil marriage for same-sex couples – and refuse to articulate a sensible argument that is not based on religious dogma or just plain hilariously bad information.

    And by the way, same-sex relationships are not a “lifestyle”. They are the product of love, like the love you so ardently declare Mormons have for all of humanity. We are born attracted to people of the same sex. Living in a gated community is a lifestyle. I am, quite frankly, sick and tired of hearing my essence being boiled down to nothing but a “lifestyle choice” when in fact, there was nothing to choose. It’s highly offensive to me when you say that.

    While it may be fair to say that some do not have an educated view of the LDS church, that’s really small potatoes in the grand scheme of things and is nothing more than distracter from the issue here – the LDS church attempting to codify their beliefs.

  • AdamK

    It’s a wonder they didn’t invent the burqa right then.

  • Whitewitch

    Chris – no one wants to be married in your “Church”…you are safe from the marauding hordes of gay men and women who you believe are pounding on the temple doors to be let in to be married by your elders.

    Children (those under 18) are always exceptions to laws, and the laws protecting them from sex with adults stand – not because they are not equal but because they are BELOW the age of consent. Well maybe not in your church, but out here in the real world we believe that one must be of an age to consent to such things and that is not before the 18th year of their life.

    Polygamy – IMHO – go for it. I don’t care how many wives you have, but you better be prepared to let your womenfolk have multiple husbands because that is equality under the law.

    So when you start down your very slippery slop, please please please use the “reasonable man/woman” principle in your statements – okay.

    Everyone should in fact be treated equally – ADULTS…not children, not cats, not dogs….not whatever ugliness you can create in your head that is the harbinger of the end of the world.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    They have always been directly involved in political issues. From day one. Their whole point was to move into an area, and take over the political and financial processes of the community, and remold it to benefit them and only them.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    They were often disliked because they would move to an area en-masse, and impose their will on that community. By voting as a bloc they took over town councils, and imposed their own beliefs the people who were already there. Then whenever a Mormon got himself into legal trouble, the church would have a fund raiser, and they would just buy their way out of it. Not to mention, their illegal banking ventures that resulted in the need of Smith to flee to Missouri. Where he stirred up even more trouble, this time violent, earning him a treason charge. Then he fled to Illinois, where he was again charged with treason. They managed to get people in positions of power in the Illinois government, and used that to protect themselves. Granting themselves a city charter that gave virtually open-ended powers to the city to act as an autonomous entity – and giving them the ability to deny the laws of the state at will. All the while they always billed themselves as an oppressed minority and victims (like they still do), and actively lobbied anyone with any political or financial power who would listen, to protect them. Smith was a petty man, who excommunicated anyone who disagreed with him… or just people who objected to him proposing to their wives.

  • Stev84

    As long as the Mormons try to write their religious beliefs into the law, they aren’t “tolerating” any other point of view.

  • UncleBucky

    Your sky god does not exist, babe. So therefore it is meaningless that such a constructed deity loves one or another person.

    What counts is, my dear, YOUR CULT staying out of my business.

  • UncleBucky

    Protect marriage from what? From Divorce. From Poverty. From Interference by people of certain bigoted and interfering faiths, such as the Mormon cult. Anyway, yeah, we need to protect marriage – our marriages, whoever we are, from outside unearned interference.

  • Whitewitch

    So sorry Kent…as a Mom – I can not understand how a mother would ever be able to not see her son, love him and have him call.

  • UncleBucky

    Nah. Go away.

  • UncleBucky

    Right. It’s a contract. And has nothing to do with anyone’s religion. Yet it must be equal to any other marriage contract. Yep.

  • Whitewitch

    WARNING warning – Laugh alert…you made me blow coffee through my nose! Thanks for the morning giggle Bomer.

  • UncleBucky

    To be civil after what your moronic cult did to us time and again?

    Be serious, chuckles.

  • UncleBucky

    Ironic? No, it’s funny. And you’re the butt of the joke. Stop replying. Hahhaha!

  • UncleBucky

    After all those responses, you chose (or your call center manager) chose Hal’s response?

    Hahhahaahaahahahahaahhahaha Cult.

  • Stev84

    A Mormon being worried about polygamy. The hypocrisy is mindboggling.

  • UncleBucky

    Answer to your last question:

    No. Your treatment is not equal. Therefore you will not be treated equally, just as we don’t treat criminals equal to law-abiding citizens.

  • UncleBucky

    Yep, let’s tax the Mormon business cult beyond the point that all of its leaders eyes’ bulge out and they fall over…

  • UncleBucky

    Yay. Gary did good!

    Let’s hope that the LDS gets Karma with whipped cream and a maraschino cherry on top! Haha!

  • Whitewitch

    Apparently Julie was just a drive-by Morman and could not stay for the responses….so like the intolerant to rant and run.

    Excellent post BeccaM. Someday – when I grow up I hope to have such a good stream of writing in response to people who like Julie prefer to live in blind obedience. I wish she had read this – it might have opened her eyes..

  • Stev84

    You aren’t just “disagreeing”! You are trying to force others to share your views by the force of law.

    If you disagreed, you would only apply your beliefs to yourself and let others be.

  • cantake8

    Your Mormon church has given you a treat: their reprehensible actions covered in words that do not match. Plainly, you have been served a candy coated TURD, and you savor every bite, choosing not to recognize the mismatch.

    You and your religion don’t offend. But your willful stupidity about your church and the quaint way you serve it up balance somewhere between pitiful and sinister.

  • UncleBucky

    Bingo.

  • UncleBucky

    Yep, bravo. Time to rout the Mormon war on humanity, as it were! Since humanity is MORE than Mormon white privilege (regardless how they have tried to paint and patch their earlier views)…

  • UncleBucky

    Right, free speech is not without costs.

    So if Chris espouses “free speech” there are consequences, don’t we know!

  • UncleBucky

    There never was a discussion started by Julia. And it seems with Chris.

    There is no negotiation with bigots and bullies, namely, the Mormon cult.

  • UncleBucky

    And if the Mormon cult teaches positions on political issues….

    Tax ‘em until their President/Apostle’s eyes bulge out and he falls over…

  • Stev84

    This so not a “disagreement”, you disgusting scumbag.

    A disagreement would be “I disagree with same-sex marriage, so I’m not going to get gay married”.

    What the Mormons (and many other Christians for that matter) do is “I disagree with same-sex marriage, so no one should get gay married and I will spend millions and lots of my time to make sure that my personal religious beliefs are written into laws that apply to everyone”

  • Stev84

    Mormonism has many typical cult characteristics:

    * an all powerful leader who speaks for god and has to be obeyed
    * a huge emphasize on money and tithing
    * they monopolize people’s time and make their whole social life revolve around the church
    * shunning of apostates and non-Mormons (who can’t enter the temple for example)
    * extreme intrusion into people’s private lives, like interrogating them about their sex lives (even children)
    * they hide information about the cult’s history from their followers. Certain things aren’t taught and research into it is heavily discouraged

  • Julia Allred

    This is my 2nd response. You can read my first one on Chris’ comment above.

    You want an explanation? Here it is. Mormons are told, as anyone else who believes the bible, to love one another. We are not told to embrace the lifestyles of everyone on earth and accept their ideas as our own. I’m grateful to live in a country where we can practice our religious beliefs. I’m grateful for the right to vote. I’m not trying to impose my views on anyone. If I am expected to tolerate different view points, shouldn’t it work both ways? I’m not telling you to believe in my religion. Just don’t pretend to know more about my religion than I do.

    God loves each of us– gay, straight, sinner, saint. The same right that is allowing gays to marry is the same right that I have to practice my religion. I am grateful to live in the USA.

    By the way, the lds church does not allow plural marriage, marrying your cousins” etc. The numerous comments I’ve received about these things simply proves my point that people are making uninformed judgements about myself and my religion. I truly hope this comment doesn’t offend anyone. Happy holidays! :)

  • UncleBucky

    Ah, so good. I must be tired. I could never have done as well as Becca!

    Right, we don’t have “talk with Mormons” anymore. They have put their nonsense in plain print. All we have to do is daylight them, oppose them and show them for the bigots they really are.

    Remember, Mormons, you’re a bigot if you stay with the LDS. If you leave, you’re possibly on the mend.

  • UncleBucky

    Bingo! :)

  • UncleBucky

    Why is it that when the victim of the bully fights back, the bully puts on a fake lambskin and starts crying against the “bully” who fought back?

    The LDS is nothing but a cruel cult. And that’s my stand, as I’ve experienced it. Yes, they do use fake lambskins to appear to be unbiased, but if you go against any of their golden calves, bingo, you get beaten up (verbally or otherwise).

    Let’s do an experiment. If two people want to marry and they appear opposite-gendered, the Mormons applaud. If those two appear same-gendered, Mormons get all itchy and they start striking out. Sure, some do it more than others, but it’s the “Official Mormon Voice” that counts. And we know what that voice says.

    Ain’t buying it, Julia.

  • UncleBucky

    Errrr, let’s be careful here and say who “we” are. I’m gettin’ confused who is who! :D

  • Julia Allred

    Thank you for sharing this, Chris. Obviously my simple comment on this ignorant and sarcastic article has been taken the wrong way by people who are determined to disagree with a religion they do not fully understand. Thank you for interpreting my original comment correctly.

    Disagreeing with someone does not make a person intolerant. It just means that you disagree.

    I will not be responding to snarky comments. You believe what you want and let me do the same. :) happy holidays!

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    The LDS Church has changed its fundamental beliefs multiple times to accommodate civil society, and the world didn’t come to an end. In fact, it was quite profitable for them. Eventually, this will be no different.

  • UncleBucky

    Tough luck, Mormons. Now go find another scapegoat for your own problems of self-image. Might be your founder that you need to ceremonially dispatch finally.

  • cantake8

    Bravo rmthunter!
    If one sticks his toe into a mouse trap and it springs shut, don’t blame the lawn mower.

  • cantake8

    Empathy is a deficit of conservatism.

  • cantake8

    SNAP!

  • cantake8

    Especially when they’re selling nothing for the low low price of your suspension of disbelief.

  • cole3244

    some in the world still treat their women this way, we are advanced compared to some anyway.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Great! Sometimes you just want to get on with your daily life and not have to deal with religious salespeople.

  • cole3244

    as many times as the number of wives allowed over the years.

  • cole3244

    as many times as the number of wives allowed over the years.

  • cole3244

    there are exceptions to every rule and you just named two.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Ha! Great work! Nothing fights religion like fact.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Ok, you’ve cited a few links as to the LDS’s position on SSM.

    The reasoning seems to be that marriage needs to be protected. The question has always been “from what?”.

    There has been legal same-sex civil marriage for a very long time in Massachusetts. Heterosexual people are still enjoying marriage in that state. No one has attempted to marry an animal. Other states have done the same thing, with the same results. So it would appear that there is no danger to what has been called “traditional marriage”. So this point fails on logic and social experience.

    What we are left with is a religious objection to civil marriage. That’s not how we run things in this country – religions are free to believe what they wish, but are not allowed to set public policy. Which is what the LDS church, and other churches, are trying to do. They developed a public campaign to enact Proposition 8 in California. On what basis?

    The basis seems to be that SSM is “ungodly” and yucky. Logic has not entered into it at all, the nation’s experience with SSM has been neutral and even positive.

    That’s why people are calling the LDS church a hive of bigotry – there’s no logical reason for them to object to SSM. It’s all based on nebulous ideas solely based on church teachings and no logic, and couched in terms like “The Divine Insttitution of Marriage.” There’s no inherent logical reason for same-sex couples to be denied civil marriage. None. What we are left with is dogma based on the feeling that we are yucky. That’s why we call this stance bigoted.

    I’ll grant you that some of the rhetoric seen here is harsh. I think some of it has been earned, though. We’ve been on the short end of the stick for a very long time and you can’t expect people who have been beaten with that stick (sometimes literally) to be eternally patient, can you?

  • therling

    Tell them you’re an apostate and you’ll be amazed at how fast they disappear.

  • cantake8

    Advantage: Fixer!
    A couple of nice Black ladies approached me as I walked to work. They were JW’s. I said, “Ladies, your Lord doesn’t like me, I’m gay. But you should also study your church, because they didn’t like Black people for much of the 20th Century and considered you inferior, fit to be servants, suffering the curse of Ham in your hearts.”

    As I walked away, they looked like someone had cold-cocked them both.

  • Bomer

    My mother had a friend that did something like that. She was working on a college essay about cults, if I remember right, and when she was interrupted by some folks selling Jesus. She told them she was busy and they asked if they could leave her some pamphlets to read. Her friend’s response was, “Sure, but only if you take one of mine.” They smiled and agreed and her friend handed them some of her research material…it was on Satanism. She was never bothered by any of them again.

  • cantake8

    Yeah, that story underscores how troubled religion is. Frank said in his statement that he loves his son, was honored when he came out to him, and would marry him all over again.

    Apparently a majority of American Methodists support marriage equality, but the issue is pulled back into the middle ages by African membership. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the future.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    The Jehovah’s Witnesses took me off of their list. Never see one any more.

    They had the bad habit of showing up when I was working on my car. With today’s modern cars, that often involves a stream of profanity. They somehow avoided that part of the spectacle known as me working on my car, and would show up in the calmer moments.

    As soon as they started in, I would in no uncertain terms let them know of my atheism, and would spend a lot of time relating pertinent biblical history. When they’d start talking about the Ten Commandments, I’d let them know that it’s origin was largely considered to be the Code of Hammurabi. When they’d start talking about their god creating humankind, I’d ask them why he would need to do such a thing. And on and on. For every one of their presumed “gotcha” moments, I’d shoot them down in flames.

    The first guy was flummoxed, and gave up, telling me that he would pray for me. I followed him out to his car and continued talking while he was shaking his head. He couldn’t leave fast enough. My roommates had been listening at the window and were most amused.

    The next year, they sent not one, but two guys. One was clearly an old hand, the other apparently was told “watch and learn”. The only thing he learned is that you can’t fight logic with blind faith and the most illogical and contradictory book ever written, the bible.

    Since he left unsuccessful, I have never been bothered by Witnesses. I am free to work on my car, and to cuss the engineers who have never picked up a screwdriver in their lives. Kinda nice, actually.

  • ArthurH

    Hear hear! I noted an item buried in The Wall Street Journal on December 20 of how the United Methodist Church defrocked Pennsylvania minister Frank Schaefer for the “crime” of officiating over the gay marriage of his son. The marriage took place in Massachusetts in 2007 but the Methodist officials didn’t get wind of it until last September. They ordered Schaefer to resign but he argued he did nothing wrong. So the officials defrocked him and booted him from the religion be had served for nearly 40 years. I mean, if you can’t stand by your own son…

  • cantake8

    You’ve nailed it. There was a reporter on NPR and I can’t quite remember the topic, but he pointed out the common mental fallacy of leaving out the majority when considering topics: “race” means “Black,” “gender” means “female,” “equality” means “gay,” and “faith based” means “Christian.”

  • cantake8

    Knowledge is the enemy of religion.
    Most religions were in great shape when people didn’t know where the Sun went at night.

  • Buford

    Good point… can we assume that God supported this decision, since a decision in their favor would have certainly been attributed to His divine involvement…?

  • Buford

    Great comment, but I can’t even get far enough into their logic to focus on the hypocrisy that you so eloquently highlighted. Instead, I can’t get past the fundamental ridiculousness of spouting ‘support for traditional marriage’ as a reason to prohibit gay marriages… since the two have NO impact upon one another.

  • olandp

    “‘I don’t really care what justification you have for trying to rip apart our marriages’- sounds like the discussion is over.”

    That’s because it is.

  • Dave of the Jungle

    The Mountain Meadows Massacre does come to mind.

  • olandp

    Perhaps you could explain to us, the concept of “lying for the lord.”

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    Exactly. I’m not Mormon. Why should Mormons get to tell me what I can and can’t do?

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    All of it is just made up superstition. In the case of Mormonism we know that a convicted con-artist named Joseph Smith made it up. The other religions are old enough so that we don’t know who made up those stories. That’s the only difference. A cult is just a religion that hasn’t lasted long enough to be “respectable” and therefore above criticism by rational people.

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    How can we have a civil discussion if you aren’t willing to accept me as entitled to equal rights under the law? I don’t think much of your religion but I would be against laws that restricted your right to believe as you do. Obviously that attitude is not reciprocal since you are against equal rights for gay people, so your belly-aching is not terribly welcome here.

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    Black people were limited as to how high they could go in the church until 1979. I know bigotry when I see it. I know quite a bit about the Mormon church. The more I know, the less impressed I am by the shiny veneer and toothy smiles from its adherents.

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    Not just the wealthy ones! One of my acquaintances was hounded endlessly at church because he hadn’t donated to Prop 8 (and wasn’t going to).

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    Imagine that gays were spending millions to enshrine discrimination against Mormons into state Constitutions. Now, how does it sound. “But we’re just expressing out point of view” wouldn’t be a very convincing argument to you, now would it. Try a little empathy. Imagine you are gay and how you would feel.

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    I have an acquaintance (not quite friends but friendly) who is Mormon, married with kids, but a very good ally to his gay friends and colleagues. He was threatened back in 2008 because he had not donated to the Prop 8 campaign. He told them he wouldn’t and told them why. They kept coming back. This is the reality of the Mormon church. There is a lot of pressure on folks that don’t follow the teachings on political issues.

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    All the Mormons I talk to are in favor of gay marriage. Perhaps my sample of opera-singing Mormons living in big cities is not representative of the religion as a whole.

  • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

    Don’t be so quick to give Mormons a pass because they were so mistreated in the past. Yes, they often were. They just as often turned around and were just as horrid to other people.

  • lynchie

    Religions are all about fund raising, especially the catholics. They say you can buy your way into heaven and love to raise fear in their flocks about getting through the pearly gates.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    What you’re missing here is that those opposing same-sex marriage have not been able to come up with reasons outside of religious bias, which by definition is not rational. I can’t see that it’s bigoted to reject an argument that rests solely on prejudice. I don’t personally agree with the name-calling, but I do take into account that people’s lives have been damaged by the Church’s actions.

    As for the LDS Church being hateful, aside from generating $20 million to take away a fundamental right from same-sex couples, the tone of the editorials from Deseret News should give you a hint.

  • Bomer

    I really want to get one of those books that looks like a bible but you prime them with flash paper so that when you open it the inside bursts into flame. Then the Jehovah’s Witnesses show up (it’s always them for me) and they try to talk to me about Jesus I can tell them, “I would love to but I have a problem. Every time I open one of these things this happens. ::FOOM!::”

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    “If your motives are truly to provide equal marriage opportunities for
    all, then this in theory includes all of the groups I mentioned above.”

    No, it doesn’t. The assumption in marriage law is that we’re dealing with adults who are qualified to marry. As I pointed out above, there are rational restrictions on the marriage of minors and incestuous marriages, and historical justification for forbidding polygamy. Wild surmises in this area don’t contribute to the discussion in any way. On the other side, there are no rational justifications for forbidding the marriage of two persons of the same sex. Opponents have tried again and again to come up with rational arguments, and they all devolve down to religious bias, which is not a justification for withholding fundamental rights.

    A lot of the problem, I think, comes from what is touted as “the” definition of marriage, which is really only “a” definition of marriage grounded in religious doctrine. (There are, in fact, a couple of human societies that don’t recognize marriage at all.) I much prefer Joseph W. Campbell’s definition, which has the virtue of being grounded in reality: “Marriage is the recognition by the community of the establishment of a new household.” That’s one that seems to hold true across cultures and throughout history.

  • HeartlandLiberal

    I really did not know about the history of Joseph Smith’s death. Your post today sent me to the Google, and I landed at a Wikipedia article worth quoting from to contrast with the pious and hypocritical vapidity of the quotes from the Utah newspapers above.

    The death of Joseph Smith, Jr. on June 27, 1844, marked a turning point for the Latter Day Saint movement, of which Smith was the founder and leader. When he was attacked and killed by a mob, Smith was the mayor of Nauvoo, Illinois, and running for President of the United States.[1] He was killed while jailed in Carthage, Illinois, on charges relating to his ordering the destruction of facilities producing the Nauvoo Expositor, a newspaper whose first and only edition claimed Smith was practicing polygamy and that he intended to set himself up as a theocratic
    king. Smith voluntarily surrendered to the authorities at the county
    seat at Carthage to face the charges that he was accused of. While he
    was in jail awaiting trial an armed mob of men with painted faces
    stormed the jail and shot him and his brother Hyrum to death. The Latter Day Saints view Joseph and Hyrum as martyrs.

    Several of Smith’s disaffected associates at Nauvoo and Hancock County, Illinois, joined together to publish a newspaper called the Nauvoo Expositor. Its first and only issue was published June 7, 1844.[2]:v6,p430
    Some of these associates alleged that Smith tried to marry their wives.
    About eight of Smith’s wives were also married to other men (four were
    Mormon men in good standing, who in a few cases acted as a witness in
    Smith’s marriage to his wife) at the time they married Smith. Typically,
    these women continued to live with their first husband, not Smith. Some
    accounts say Smith may have had sexual relations with one wife, who
    later in her life stated that he fathered children by one or two of his
    wives,[3] although the reliability of these sources is disputed.[4]
    The bulk of the paper was devoted to three main criticisms of Smith: (1) The opinion that Smith had once been a true prophet, but had fallen by advocating polygamy, exaltation and other controversial doctrines; (2) the opinion that Smith, as both Mayor of Nauvoo
    and President of the Church, held too much power, which was further
    consolidated by the overwhelmingly Mormon make-up of Nauvoo’s courts and
    city council, and wanted to establish a theocracy via the Council of Fifty; and (3) the belief that Smith had corrupted women by forcing, coercing or introducing them into plural marriage.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Joseph_Smith

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    1) Red herring, and more than a little simplistic. The point is, there are rational reasons for restricting marriage in certain circumstances, such as age and degree of consanguinity. I find the objections of Mormons and Christians in general to polygamy to be somewhat disingenuous, given the historical context, but there, also, polygamy is an institution that has proven to be open to abuse. (And in that regard, minors have the right not to be abused or to be bartered off as property, for which there is ample Biblical precedent.) The general principle of equal treatment under the law is pretty much cut and dried, but like all legal principles, it is a generality. Legislatures and courts get to deal with the specifics.

    2) Again, red herring. Churches have very robust Constitution guarantees in this country against government interference in their beliefs and practices (although human and animal sacrifice is still frowned upon). This “argument” is not an argument at all, since churches are under no threat of having the government intrude on their beliefs, doctrines, or practices.

    Your last question, on examination, is completely meaningless — what does it mean to ask if those who do not favor gay marriage will be given equal treatment? To do what — not marry a person of the same sex? (And despite what you hear from the likes of Bryan Fischer or Mat Staver, no one is going to be forced to do that.) There’s not a lot of clarity here. Perhaps you’d care to explain exactly what you mean.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    I’m reminded of the Louisiana state legislator who supported Jindal’s school voucher program including religious schools until a Muslim school applied to the program. She though “religious” meant “Christian.”

    That’s the level of mental acuity we’re dealing with here.

  • samNH

    I would agree with that. Accountability is not something the LDS is very good about. All donations go to the headquarters and there is no accounting to the local church or at any other level that the top corporate executives. I have read that the charitable work amounts to less than 1% of the annual take, and mostly it goes to other Mormons. Much goes to building more temples and proselytizing, though the young missionaries have to pay their own way. I guess it’s spent on Books of Mormon and other glossy publications. I have also read that their numbers are falling as more people in the internet age come to understand that the LDS is a fraud and a con, and that the BoM is a fantasy.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    In other words, “If you object to our trying to incorporate our bigotry into civil law, then you’re a bigot.”

    We’ve heard the opposing viewpoints, ad nauseam, and we’ve heard the “rational” arguments against same-sex marriage (as well as gay civil rights in general), and they all boil down to a push for the supremacy of religious doctrine over civil law.

    The LDS Church, like any other entity (after all, “Corporations are people, my friend.”), is free to express its viewpoint. The rest of us are free to criticize that viewpoint in whatever terms we deem appropriate. What the LDS Church is not free to do is to violate my Constitutional rights in the name of religion. If the backlash hurts, well, every action has consequences.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    So enlighten us, rather than just moaning about how awful we are.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    That last quote from Deseret News is actually funny, considering the lame arguments the state has presented all along.

    I suspect the Mormons are going to dig in their heels on this one. It’s one thing to have a revelation about treating gays equally in the workplace or in public accommodations, but they have a lot invested in their own definition of marriage, and, as is usual with patriarchal, authoritarian religions, it rests on procreation. They’re not going to shift on that very easily.

  • cantake8

    Playing stupid is not the same as playing devil’s advocate. Your “questions” don’t apply to law-abiding couples seeking the benefits and protections of legally recognized marriage.

  • cantake8

    It infuriates people like Chris that gays and lesbians are finally getting some of the “special rights” heterosexuals have reserved for themselves for centuries.

  • cantake8

    It was often mentioned that the reason the Romneys didn’t want to release their tax returns was because they hadn’t paid the church its full TEN PERCENT.

    I am a strong believer in charitable works. The LDS and RCC, and the rest of religions should be allowed to deduct DIRECT CHARITABLE EXPENDITURES. Any hall, equipment or resources used EXCLUSIVELY for feeding the poor, providing state-accredited skills training and education, shelter, and state board approved counseling (not religious mumbo jumbo) should be tax deductible. All the rest of it should be taxable.

    Religious people whine that they’ve already paid taxes, why should the church have to pay taxes again? That argument could be used by any business. Why should a restaurant have to pay taxes on money paid to it by people who have already paid income tax? Because it is BUSINESS REVENUE… churches make most of theirs off the poor.

    Speaking of the RCC: time for the U.S. to STOP recognizing their “nation status,” which was conferred upon them by Mussolini in exchange for the RCC’s support of his dictatorship and fascist state.

  • cantake8

    And they know NOTHING about it, except what Glen Beck told them.

  • cantake8

    A group of businesspeople in Denver tried to open a bar and events center as a religion. Apparently one needs superstition and mythology to qualify for religious tax exemption. Serving margarita communion with chips and salsa that have been transubstantiated into flesh and blood offerings through incantations such as “Let the party begin!” isn’t good enough.

    Religion is a stunning scam paid for in large part by non-members who provide the tax base for infrastructure, civic and protective services. People who donate to churches can deduct those contributions from their taxes on Schedule A. Why can’t sports fans deduct the cost of their tickets and beer — to which they’re more dedicated than many churchgoers to their institutions.

    HOW POPULAR WOULD JESUS BE IF HE WASN’T TAX EXEMPT?

  • cantake8

    It’s tiring.

  • cantake8

    “What can be said about the money spent by supporters of gay marriage?”
    It is money that has been spent to fend off Mormon bigotry.
    Next question?

  • cantake8

    Don’t think I hadn’t considered doing so. I used to work the door in a bar and needed to stay until everyone was done counting out for the night and all the money was in the safe. Then we’d go out and get breakfast. Home at 4:30am, showered and in bed by 5:30am. Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses at 9:00am sharp.

    I did point at one particularly handsome missionary and invited him back later, alone: “I’m sure you can make some noises I would enjoy hearing.” That unglued him and the stream of profanity from his world hole was hilarious.

  • samiinh

    Romney made much of his contribution to the LDS, but in reality, his 10% contribution were the dues he had to pay to remain a member in good standing, not unlike belonging to a fancy country club. Why does he get a tax deduction for such dues? The LDS uses the money not for charitable activity, but to buy more business to increase its wealth. The LDS is nothing more than a huge and wealthy corporation. Time for them to lose their tax deductions, along with the RCC.

  • cantake8

    I’ve gone around with Mormons on this thread who cannot see the unjust treatment of gays and lesbians by their cult. They can’t present any concrete proof of how opposing the marriage of two law-abiding homosexuals “protects” heterosexual marriages. Nor can they state how homosexuals marrying imperils the marriage of anyone else: in states where gays and lesbians can legally marry, heterosexuals are in no way impeded from doing the same thing.

    What has happened in Utah, long before gays and lesbians could marry, is that their rate of divorce is higher than the national average. Marriage in that state obviously needs protection from heterosexuals and the statistics prove it.

    Churches are in no way barred from exercising the same discrimination they’ve used for centuries against marrying anyone who doesn’t meet their standard.

    In states with equal access laws that protect people on the basis of age, gender, ethnicity, ability, religion and sexuality; there are businesspeople who have attempted to deny business services to gays and lesbians. They have broken the same law. What they are really complaining about is that their wrongly perceived “right” to discriminate against others based on religion has been infringed. Nobody has stopped them from hanging crosses on the walls of their business or from going to church or praying.

    The Mormon position of “protecting marriage” strongly resembles the Jim Crow south, where drinking fountains, bathrooms and restaurants used by Whites were kept “pure” by barring non-whites.

  • cantake8

    I gave you the benefit of the doubt and read your article. It covers no new ground and functions only for those who believe that “the Church” has a definition of marriage with any civil merit. The Church fails in this single point.

    It states: “Protecting marriage between a man and a woman does not affect Church members’ Christian obligations of love, kindness and humanity toward all people.”

    In states where gays and lesbians can legally marry, heterosexuals
    can still marry and are not impeded in the least from doing so.

    The article never states how the opposition of marriage for gay and lesbian couples actually PROTECTS marriage for heterosexual pairings. Seeing that Utah has a higher rate of divorce than the national average, it appears marriage needs to be protected from cavalier treatment of a supposedly sacred pact by heterosexuals.

    The Mormon position of “protecting marriage” strongly resembles the Jim Crow south, where drinking fountains, bathrooms and restaurants used by Whites were kept “pure” by barring non-whites.

  • cantake8

    I read perfectly well.
    You fail to write anything worth reading, instead of acting like you’re the soul of civility who has reached a sticking point past which you cannot advance because people have called out Mormonism.

  • http://poodyheads.wordpress.com/ zorbear

    Is it okay to cut those two open to make certain?
    /snark

  • Bomer

    No slippery slope fallacies are not necessary; all they do is muddy the waters. Again, marriage law is between two adult persons. People under 18 are not considered an adult and there for can not enter into a marriage contract without parental permission.

    As for polygamy, again, as long as it’s between consenting adults and isn’t abusive or exploitative I don’t see the problem with it. There might be problems with inheritance laws and who gets what if one of the parties opts for divorce though.

    And marriage equality really is that cut-and-dried. It’s simply civil marriage between two consenting adults regardless of gender. That’s it, really, honestly.

    But all this has been pointed out to you already by other posters here. So either you are just arguing in bad faith, or you are being willfully ignorant.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Next time, show up and open the door while nude. That’ll freak ‘em right the f*ck out.

  • Chris

    cantake8-

    Sorry, didn’t know I was on a time limit.

    The main point for me writing these comments was to point out inaccurate statements made about the LDS Church and to counter accusations of being “bigoted”. As you can see from above, these comments were not received very well, and were often responded to with the same hate and venom that the LDS Church and its members are accused of possessing.

    I doubt I will sway anyone to my point of view here, and that is all-right with me. What I would like to do is to set the records straight. Below are some links to official statements made by the Church regarding marriage. The LDS Newsroom website as well as lds.org are also very helpful to those who are actually interested in what the Church teaches and believes. Some might say I am avoiding the issue, but I think that these statements express LDS beliefs better and more accurately than I could:

    http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage

    http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/same-sex-marriage-and-proposition-8

    I highly doubt that these Church statements will be received by anyone here. And I’m sure I’ll be accused of being a “bigot” several dozen more times. So be it.

    Since we’re talking about rights here, myself and other members of the LDS Church have the right to express opinions. Just as those who support gay marriage have the right to have their voices heard in the public square, so do those who disagree with them. Religious institutions are also allowed to be involved in public and civic affairs, though perhaps not in the exact same way private citizens are allowed to participate (yes, I am aware of the citation they received for Prop 8). And while no one is guaranteed freedom from criticism, I think that most would agree that civil conversations are the ideal.

    Ultimately, hope this helps and thanks for the responses.

    Chris

  • kenthomes

    People like me who were lucky….many of the others killed themselves. So much for how nice the Mormons are.

  • kenthomes

    You are definately in a cult, when you choose your religion over your damn children! Sheesh!!

  • Chris

    cantake8-

    You need to read more carefully.

    “This comment isn’t about gay marriage at all; it is about how differing viewpoints are analyzed and discussed. From what I’ve seen thus far in a majority of the comments, there are plenty of people willing to condemn the LDS church, calling members of said church “bigots” and “cultists” (sometimes by persons who know little or nothing about LDS church), as part of their complaint that the LDS Church is bigoted, hateful and uninformed. Ironic?”

    Here, I’m simply asking for people to consider both viewpoints and (hopefully) have a civil discussion with anyone being called a “MORON” or “bigot” or “cultist”. Perhaps that too much to ask…

  • kenthomes

    Yes….you have to suspend all critical thinking skills to become a member of the momo cult.

  • kenthomes

    As an gay ex-Mormon, I say HERE, HERE!

  • kenthomes

    As an ex-gay Mormon…..I know how this cult works very well. My brother quit the church and the both of us have been “shunned” by our warm and cuddly Mormon family. Yes….they are all smiles and full of fake “;love” when we are around, for a funeral or something, but past that, they have nothing to do with us. I gave up calling years ago, because it was a one way street. This is what your wonderful religion has done to us! It destroys families.

  • kenthomes

    Wow! I could never have said it better than that. THANK YOU!

  • Chris

    Hal-

    Thanks for the response; I’ll try to clarify my point as best I can. You make a very good point, that the number of persons wanting more expanded definitions of marriage are in the minority. However, the point I was making is: if you are going to use the “equality for all” argument, then you need to consider exactly what that means. If your motives are truly to provide equal marriage opportunities for all, then this in theory includes all of the groups I mentioned above. If being in the minority disqualifies them from consideration, than what does that say about gay marriages, which are also in the minority?

    You also mentioned that I committed the “slippery slope” fallacy. However, these are necessary things to consider if you are talking about marriage equality across the board, and we can see some of these changes already being adopted, such as the softening of anti-polygamy laws in Utah (which I do not support).

    Again, my point is that the argument of “marriage equality for all” is not as simple or cut-and-dry as it seems.

    Best,

    Chris

  • kenthomes

    Excuse me….I was raised Mormon and am directly related to Joseph Smith through George Albert Smith. I am gay and was told by the “prophet” and all of my church leaders, that I was an abomination and next to murder. I do not need you to tell me what the church believes. But nice try. By the way…bullies are people that take away the rights of other people, not the other way around. Fighting back against a bully does not make you a bigot. Taking away my rights does. Being a Mormon requires complete obedience with no “thinking” required. Otherwise, you will have your ass hauled up before a Bishop’s court and told to repent or get excommunicated. Next!

  • kenthomes

    Religion is the greatest tragedy to ever happen to humankind!

  • Monoceros Forth

    I suggest that the author and any other “Mormon basher” do some research and actually find out why Mormons appose same-sex marriage.

    Then you, as a Mormon, are under the principle of freedom of religion free not to marry someone of the same gender as you. That’s as far as your rights go and no further.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Uhhh. weeeellllll…..

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    C’mon now, these were good, “sturdy” women who could work hard and likely had good child-bearing hips. So that they could give him many sons, which would grow up to be exactly like him.

    Nothing egotistical about that, of course.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    You are apparently a Mormon. You came here to talk. Talk to us and explain it. If you think that Mormons are being persecuted by the big ol’ mean gays, then make your case.

    You say we’re uninformed, well then, inform us. Again, make your case.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Probably because women were not allowed an education in primitive times, and thus, men were the only ones capable of writing the rules.

    You know, keep ‘em uneducated, barefoot and pregnant.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Quit trying to steer the conversation away from what has been asked of you: Explain why the Mormon Church should set policy for civil marriages in this country.

  • Hal

    Chris. your “slippery slope” argument can be used against ANY change to ANY law.

    Imagine that I am in Mississippi in the 1960s, during the voter registration drives. I say, we can’t allow black people to vote, because, next thing you know, we’ll be letting children vote, and sheep! Would you consider this a strong argument? I’m too polite to tell you the words that I would use for it.

    Wake up, man! You sound like an intelligent guy. But you have a moral obligation to use a little common sense, and not just repeat things. You also have a moral obligation to look around you. Do you see lots of parents marching in the streets, protesting about not being able to marry their children? The number of parents wanting to marry their children is probably about the same as the number of people who think they are Napoleon. Look at all the states and countries that now have equal marriage laws. Have any of them changed their laws to allow parents to marry their children? Come on, this is not an argument worthy of an intelligent adult. And do any of those states or countries now require religious groups to marry same-sex couples? No, of course not.

    I’m guessing that in an unguarded moment you would agree that these are TERRIBLE arguments you are using. Not just a little bad, but really really awful. Now here’s your third moral obligation. When you discover that you have a bad argument, you are obligated to stop using it. And when all your arguments wither away, you are obligated to rethink your position. Many, many people have done this. The huge swing in public opinion on this issue is not all due to one side dying off. A lot of it comes from people who had one position, and realized it was wrong. They learned that their child was gay, or their mother, or Liberace. Or they just went out and talked to some actual gay people.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    So, what is your point? That we are insufficiently informed about the LDS church? That’s the only thing I’ve gotten from your comments.

    You seem to also be saying that our lack of information is why we don’t understand why the church opposes same-sex marriage.

    Ok, Fine. Inform us as to why the Mormon church opposes SSM. Also inform us why the Mormon church should get to set policy for civil marriages not only in Utah, but in other places where they’ve attempted to codify their beliefs into law.

    Really, explain this to us, You have the opportunity, but you’ve squandered it by telling us that we just don’t understand and that we’re calling you bigots. Tell us why this is so, huh?

    We’re waiting.

  • mirror

    When your position is to destroy the loving marriage and family relationships of other people, the discussion really is over. You are saying you have just as much right to hurt others as they have to demand not to be hurt. Note how you are never under threat of being hurt anywhere in the process.

  • mirror

    We know your bullying by the action of your religion’s leadership in significant tangible efforts to destroy and undermine our families and the families of our gay and lesbian friends, family, and loved one’s in California and elsewhere.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    Oh, we’ve heard your point of view. Expensive advertising campaigns on the part of the Mormon Church have made us hear it well. Complete with half-truths, out-and-out lies and innuendo all designed to make us look like degenerates.

    And this:

    Also, if spending millions of dollars to support a viewpoint is wrong,
    what can be said about the money spent by supporters of gay marriage?

    It’s called defense. It’s called correcting the record. It’s called “the fight for civil rights.”

  • cantake8

    Is that what you’d suggest? I suggest you share your point of view and stuff your indignities up your ass.

  • EyeTee

    Oh, this is SO tiresome, and we have dealt with these before.

    As to (1): marriage laws as currently written are not gender-specific. (The real revolution in marriage came when women stopped being property). These laws apply to two unrelated adults who are capable of free consent. That eliminates your three straw men. In facdt, you do not need to re-write marriage laws to include same sex couples.

    (2). Churches have wide latitude to decide whom to marry. For example, the Roman Catholics refuse to marry people who are not Catholic, or people who are civilly divorced. They do not get sued or forced to change their religious doctrine. They have complete religious freedom. Ditto the Mormons , Jews, or Muslims. No cleric is required to go against their Church doctrine. And that will not change.

    You want religious freedom? Religious freedom is allowing those denominations who support marriage equality to marry their congregants who qualify. Mormons shouldn’t be dictating doctrine to Episcopalians, OR vv.

  • cantake8

    You’re not a “Mormon,” you’re a MORON. How many times must you be asked to make your point while you pound out words that add up to nothing?

  • cantake8

    Let’s not forget about WARREN JEFFS, the Mormon fundamentalist with multiple wives who was sought by law enforcement for his marital and sexual exploits involving underage girls. He was arrested in Colorado, as was a man who sought to aid Jeffs in his flight from the law by providing tens of thousands of dollars and firearms.

  • cantake8

    Intergenerational concerns, as well as incest, are obsessions of Mormonism.

  • cantake8

    Can you still not state your beloved Mormon rules against gays and lesbians getting married?

    Religious institutions have always been allowed to discriminate against performing the marriage of anyone who doesn’t meet their standards. Even the Mormon Church does not allow FAMILY MEMBERS who are not Mormons to enter the temple — quite an exhibition of “family values.”

    Can’t you make your fucking point? You’re so tiring, but you do underscore the stupidity required to be Mormon.

  • cantake8

    May I add that the BILLIONS of dollars raked in by the LDS be taxed and their books examined?

    It isn’t widely known, but the Mormon church requires 10% from all their members, even those on assistance. Contrary to popular perception, not a cent of Mormon church money was used “directly” to fund Proposition 8; but wealthy church members were called upon to fund the effort. Where the church got involved and breached their tax-exempt restrictions was when they allowed church property to be used as headquarters for preparing mailings and doing phone outreach.

    The Mormon church calls upon members to donate EVERYTHING: their church preachers are not paid, but commit for a few years. Janitors, gardeners, painters, all of them are Mormon worker bees volunteering for the good of the church. All the money they gather goes into coffers that are untouched for charitable outreach or ministry expenses.

  • cantake8

    There was outrage in Mississippi or Missouri (one of those states where gays and lesbians can’t marry, but first cousins can): apparently Christians preached in the quad on a college campus calling students “adulterers” and “fornicators” over loudspeakers and damning them to hell. Then a student opposed them and was hauled away by campus security and a police officer.

    Someone found out that the quad was an open forum, so wiccans; pagans; students who weren’t Islamic, but had access to information; Native Americans; Unitarians; Free Thinkers; Atheists; Hippie Free Love Revivalists; and many other groups and students signed up for a spot on the calendar. Christians were squeezed down to one date in the year, and were FURIOUS!… they thought their mythology deserved preeminence.

    Christians were mistaken and the school board told them so. Next year it is expected that a new rule will stipulate all speakers and groups must be students, faculty, or sponsored by a campus group.

  • cantake8

    Those who combine politics and religion always ruin both.

  • cantake8

    May you prosper wildly and your voice be multiplied in a world that needs to hear it. It excites me to hear reason and truth stated without any apology or vacillation.

  • cantake8

    Viewpoints opposed to equality and fairness are not worth hearing.
    Ever notice how “unfair” TV audiences are when a cheating spouse tries to explain why they sought sexual pleasure elsewhere?

    Plus you have been asked again and again to make your point, but you don’t. This leads to one conclusion: you don’t have a cogent, well-reasoned point. Otherwise you would have made it by now.

  • cantake8

    For sure!
    I had to answer the door in my underwear THREE TIMES to make them stop ringing my bell on weekend mornings. I know a couple of those guys were fascinated, but they had to act repulsed.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    “we all know all women are beautiful on the inside” Like Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter?

  • Mike_in_the_Tundra

    Do Mormons oppose same-sex marriage for any other reason than their religious beliefs? You have no right to impose your religious beliefs on others.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Bingo!

  • KingCranky

    They also insist on religious-lifestyle tax breaks subsidized by, but not available to, nonbelievers, which shows they do NOT believe that “God will provide”, a truly weak faith, not worth practicing, only mocking & ridiculing.

  • cantake8

    BRAVO! I doubt Julia will read past the 5th or 10th word, but I read every word and totally concur.

  • cantake8

    I literally L’d O-L. Thanks!

  • cantake8

    The judge would have been invited to address the church if he had gone against equality.

  • cantake8

    “Activist Judge” = “Anti Bigotry”

  • cantake8

    Religion is the number one industry that makes most of its money off the poor.

  • Mike_in_the_Tundra

    Mormons insist on calling themselves Christian. Their beliefs deviate from an essential belief of the Christian church. They are a small group (compared to all Christians) that deviates from the whole. Look up the definition of cult.

    I think I will go with this definition of bigot: A person who uses their personal beliefs to deny others of their rights. We now know that same gender marriage affects no opposite gender marriage. Nor do gay people marrying cause sterility among straight people. No one has the right to force their religious beliefs on others in the U.S.A. So what is the purpose of denying others the right to marry. Bigotry?

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    So sorry for being intolerant of your intolerance.

  • Indigo

    I think so, yes. The Abrahamic faiths left an interesting trail from Judaism to Christianity to Islam, intent on conquest at every turn. Even more curious is the extent of the Egyptian influence hovering in the back story. The claim to historic monotheism is thin, especially given their war-god’s mood swings, one for ever god in the ancient pantheon. It’s more like a cover story than a philosophical insight.

  • Bomer

    And yet scream about the boogeyman that is Sharia Law.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Exactly. I note just how often and vehemently they keep wanting their religious beliefs to determine the laws of a secular government and society.

  • Bomer

    Again, what part of secular law/secular society don’t you people get? I don’t give a flying rat’s rump what your religion says about anything. I. Really. Do. Not. Care.

    Two people of the same-sex getting a civil marriage affects you not at all. Trying to codify into secular law your particular religious beliefs about gay people very much affects us. So, no, I don’t need to know the particulars of your religion to know that you are hurting me and mine. And even if I did know them it wouldn’t magically make the hurt/harm go away.

    Seriously, if you want others to treat you well then you should really think about, oh I don’t know, not being a bunch of mean spirited bigots and mind your own damn business. Again, same-sex marriage doesn’t affect you.

  • cantake8

    Begoodness bechrist!
    The Bible must have been wonderful when people didn’t know where the Sun went at night.

    It also explains a high level of birth defects, including albinism. I read a critical exegesis of Revelations that pointed out the physical description of the Christ is exactly what an Albino from this region would look like: : depigmented skin, pink eyes, white wooly hair (Revelation 1:14 His head and
    His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a
    flame of fire. 15His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been
    made to glow in a furnace (molten bronze is bright white…)

  • Bomer

    Nope, it was just the guys. I don’t think they would have been over-looked like they were if it had been women with multiple hubbies. As for the second question; I have no idea.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    In Polynesia and pre-Christian western Europe, one woman and her various husbands…

    In Abrahamaic-derived religions, one man and his property, which could consist of many females, with varying status of ownership…

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    That was one of the many stories that Constantine decided Christians didn’t need to prescribe to when he tried to standardize Christianity early on. Another example of how they just make shit up as they go.

  • pappyvet

    It has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the dignity of being a human being

  • cantake8

    And am I correct in assuming NO WOMEN HAD MULTIPLE HUSBANDS?
    Why do so many religions cater to the basic horny god-complex of bossy men?

  • mamazboy

    Here we go with the lame default of these bigots: “A parent be allowed to marry his/her child?” What in the hell does intergenerational incest have to do with marriage equality between two consenting adults of the same sex? I’m so happy you are losing this battle; it means that rationality can prevail against vicious, irrational biogtry, even when it’s wrapped up in, as John says, a phony cry for “civility.” “Chris” and “Julia,” go peddle your shit elsewhere.

  • cantake8

    Somebody needs to apologize for Jesus taking such a goddamn long time to “get his poop in a group” and come back. Seriously, it’s prom time. I wish I believed Christian mythology, because then Jesus would return, commune with those who truly worshiped and respected him: those who gave up every comfort to feed the poor, comfort the needy, clothe the wicked, embrace their enemies, reach out to non-believers, and soothe the afflicted.

    He would spit out those who were lukewarm and self-serving, reprove those who have made themselves fat and wealthy using his name, strike down those who have used his name as a cudgel and sickle, and pull down edifices erected to impress the feeble minded.

    And he’d do it all while looking looking like an Albino Jew: white skin, pink eyes, white wooly hair (Revelation 1:14 14His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a flame of fire. 15His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been made to glow in a furnace (molten bronze is bright white).)

  • pappyvet

    One of my favs

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Don’t insult our intelligence. Do you even get the concept of “consenting adult”?

    This is why we don’t allow adults to marry children and that won’t change. Because a child cannot give informed consent. Neither can a horse or a box turtle. So put away that slippery slope BS.

    As for polygamy — and polyandry — maybe one day we’ll have that, if human culture moves in that direction. Frankly, as long as it’s not just some hoary old patriarch collecting wives, like the Mormons used to do, I don’t see a moral problem with group marriages.

    As for your point #2, c’mon. That’s even more ridiculous than your first point. Are you a Catholic? No? Then go try to get married in a Catholic church. They will turn you away. And that will remain legal. Enough with the ridiculous red herrings, because we’ve heard them before and dismissed them easily.

    Talking points are often like that: Stupid, ill-considered, illogical, and unsupported by fact.

  • cantake8

    And every time she posts a follow-up comment, it’s just more smoke. But I’m calling her out. She makes a great windmill, but does nothing other than spinning and making wind. Lots of words, plenty of indignation, but still no explanation.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Yah… lol.

    I looked at those photos and thought to myself, “Those are some seriously dour, fugly old biddies. Most guys in the harem-building business go for young, pretty girls.”

  • cantake8

    They also aren’t allowed much of an after-life, except being one of a “New Adam’s” female workforce that he breeds to populate his new planet.

  • cantake8

    And you STILL DON’T MAKE YOUR POINT.
    Are you able to see a trend in your responses? Being offended is NOT an exegesis of your religion’s opposition to equal marriage laws that include gays and lesbians. Writing a LOT of words is even less effective from you at this point.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    I blame the attempts to take the religion of one small nation-tribe and their bloodthirsty war-god — a religion so littered with cultural remnants, it tacitly acknowledges the existence of other people’s deities — and inflate that tribe’s war-god to such an improbable degree of omnipotence and omniscience, the universe itself serves no purpose in existing. Never mind the semi-clever upright apes who deliberately created that god in their own image so as to exalt themselves…

    But yeah, monotheistic faiths do tend to go down that road, don’t they?

  • http://musephotos.wordpress.com/ GarySFBCN

    If you breakup with the man in your photo, can you still be cousins?

  • cantake8

    So, Chris, YOU CAN’T MAKE YOUR POINT. What is provided is your attempt at insulting me and others who don’t buy into Mormonism. If you don’t want to be classified as a “bigoted, hateful and uninformed cultist,” don’t behave like one.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    And then there’s the story of the actual ‘first’ woman (according to the myth), Lilith…

  • Chris

    Hal-

    Thanks for the response. You bring up an interesting point, namely that “If you want to be treated with respect, then change the laws to treat everyone the same”. This sounds very good, but a few questions have to be considered:

    1. What does the “laws treat[ing] everyone the same” mean? If this is applied consistently across the board, then should:

    -Persons younger than 18 be allowed to marry (without parental consent)?
    -A parent be allowed to marry his/her child?
    -Polygamy be a legal practice?

    Some might call this a slippery slope fallacy, but in all reality, if one demands equality of EVERYONE and that EVERYONE’S views be accepted, than these are points that need to be considered. My point here is ultimately that the argument “equality for all” is not as cut and dry as it seems.

    2. The ramifications of passing pro gay marriage laws. For example, would religious institutions that do not support gay marriage be allowed to keep these viewpoints and decide whom they will perform marriages for, or, will the laws demand that they marry gay couples? My point here is that if everyone is to be treated “equally”, will those who how do not favor gay marriage be given equal treatment as well?

  • http://musephotos.wordpress.com/ GarySFBCN

    Oh go fuck off. I don’t care what you do in your temple, in your magic underwear, in your spaces for “really really good Mormons” only. I don’t care that your entire religion is based upon the lunatic hallucinations of an incentuous polygamist/child molester.

    But you INSIST on demanding that those of us who are not Mormon abide by your religious laws.

    Your church has a history of working to prevent loving same-sex couples to have even basic rights. Your church has a rich history of working to prevent LGBTs from any employment protections. Your church would support gay-bashing over supporting gay rights. Your church has directly affected my life in ways that are abhorrent.

    I shit on the Book of Mormon. I piss on the grave of Joseph Smith. And I sincerely hope that the weight of evil and hatred perpetuated by your church crushes you all.

    Yes, that is hatred. Leave us alone.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    They did try to be a state though. And had to officially give up polygamy as the price for entry — which was why more than a few Mormons either kept on quietly with it. Or, like the Romney clan, fled to Mexico to keep it going.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    My marriage to my wife has zero effect on your life. It has innumerable benefits — and accompanying commitments and responsibilities — in mine, and vastly, materially improves it.

    I will fight tooth and nail for my CIVIL marriage rights. And I will gladly point out the hypocrisy and hateful cruelty of those who would tear me and my wife apart.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Oh, we know why Mormons oppose marriage equality for gay and lesbian families.

    They hate gay people.

    Oh, they’ll do their hating with a warm smile and words that don’t sound as cruel as the words others use, but the result and desired outcome is the same.

    These gay and lesbian families exist. Many of them are raising children. You, through your desire to impose parts of your religious beliefs on non-Mormons, would deny those children legally protected families, as well as to the couples themselves.

    You call it “traditional” marriage, when what heterosexuals enjoy is anything but. There is legal divorce now. Women are not considered the property of their husbands or nearest male relatives. Heck, women are even allowed to own property and, in a hetero marriage, to own property that is not automatically considered to belong to their husbands first.

    These are relative innovations in marriage, and did not exist a few hundred years ago — and some of these aspects continued to exist in some places — including in the United States — as recently as the early 20th century.

    Traditional marriage, in some cultures, has included same sex marriage. As well as polygamy and polyandry.

    You’re not protecting anything other than your desire that gays and lesbians suffer. Because, contrary to the science and psychology, being gay is not a mental illness nor is it a sign of moral rectitude. In fact, just as the religions have been wrong about the Earth’s place in the solar system and the universe, and as they’ve been wrong about the age of the universe, they are also wrong about human sexuality and orientation.

    Yet you would cling to your prejudices. Your ignorance. And your hate — and dare to call us intolerant for objecting.

    And yes — it was bullying by the Mormons to rev up their entire American church for volunteers and donations to turn back marriage equality in California. I was there, in the weeks before the 2008 election and I saw the many, many commercials YOUR church paid to have aired. Commercials full of lies and slander and backhanded cruelty. Commercials begging viewers to ‘consider the children,’ not quite coming out to say it, but implying that gays and lesbians were a danger to them.

    We’ve had enough. And no, we will not tolerate intolerance, nor forgive the irrational hate spawned by the remnant cultural beliefs of an ignorant, warmongering bronze-age culture.

    So to reiterate: We don’t need to ‘talk to a Mormon’ to find out your views on same sex marriage. We already know: You’re against it. And you’re against it because you think gay people are moral degenerates. Well… too f*cking bad. We’re done being trodden upon.

  • Chris

    Since the word “cultist” and “cult” has been used quite often in this comments section, perhaps you could define it for me? After all, I am being called a one. (This after you assume that I am a member of the LDS church- lucky for you, you were right).

    Furthermore, if I am a bigot for not accepting another person’s views, opinions or beliefs, what does that make someone who calls another religion a “cult”?

    Finally, I’m glad that you brought up the definition of bigotry, especially since one of the definitions of “bigotry” is: “a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.” and “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices” (Merriam-Webster). According to this definition, those supporting gay marriage and those against it are BOTH bigots, because they both refuse to accept the other’s viewpoint. Another connotation of “bigot” has to do with being hateful towards another group. I doubt that simply disagreeing or taking an opposite viewpoint in (most) cases is considered being hateful. If the LDS Church is going to fit this latter connotation, then you would have to show how the Church has been hateful towards (and not just disagreeing with) those who support gay-marriage.

  • Hal

    Chris, those supporting gay marriage are not trying to deny you equal marriage rights. Do you really not see the difference? If you want to be treated with respect, then change the laws to treat everyone the same. THEN you can convince people that your views are correct. Or not.

  • Mike_in_the_Tundra

    Be more afraid of those who are familiar with your religion. Christians consider Mormons to be cultists because they consider Jesus to be a created being. That belief does not fit with the Christian belief in the Trinity. Thus you are a cultist to me. Being a bigot is an opinion. In my opinion, you are a bigot.

  • 4th Turning

    Going back 9 or 10 years but worth looking into for always useful historical perspective.
    The self-righteous usually strike me as over-compensating for some dark past something…

    Important Update: Hello! This is Brian Patrick, Producer/ Director of the movie “Burying The Past: Legacy of The Mountain Meadows Massacre.”
    I am writing to ask for your help. I have been trying very, very hard to get “Burying The Past: Legacy of The Mountain Meadows Massacre” broadcast on Public Television. I believe this is a story that deserves a nationwide audience. I receive numerous e-mails asking when the film is going to be on PBS from people who think this is a film that should play on a national level. The film is under consideration right now for a PBS program called “P.O.V.” which stands for “Point of View.” I have been told that my only chance is a grassroots movement by people writing in to P.O.V. and asking them to broadcast it. If you are moved by the film, I would be so grateful if you would be kind enough to take the time to write something on it’s behalf. (Blog Post)
    I think this film eventually did get aired. Not sure about its impact-if any. Massacres all tend to run together. Appreciate this dedicated effort to set the record straight anyway.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Exactly—-spot on!

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    “Just a thought.”—-not much of one actually.

  • Chris

    “I don’t want to spend time researching LDS rules.” – It is interesting that persons who speak negatively (to put it lightly) about the LDS Church admittedly know little about it’s beliefs or practices, nor do they care to try. There is a word for this: uninformed. I find it interesting that one group’s point of view must be heard, studied and shown fair play in the public square, but opposing groups and viewpoints do not need to be shown the same courtesy. This comment isn’t about gay marriage at all; it is about how differing viewpoints are analyzed and discussed. From what I’ve seen thus far in a majority of the comments, there are plenty of people willing to condemn the LDS church, calling members of said church “bigots” and “cultists” (sometimes by persons who know little or nothing about LDS church), as part of their complaint that the LDS Church is bigoted, hateful and uninformed. Ironic?

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    “If you want to know about Mormonism and our views on same-sex marriage, talk to a Mormon” No thanks.

  • Chris

    Wow.

    “I don’t really care what justification you have for trying to rip apart our marriages”- sounds like the discussion is over. I find it interesting how certain groups want their points and reasoning to be heard, but an opposing viewpoints are disregarded. Saying things like this really harms your credibility.

    “You folks have been spent millions in state after state trying to jam your beliefs down the throats of other Americans”- The LDS Church is taking a position, then expressing and supporting it. If doing this is “jam[ing] your beliefs down the throats of other Americans”, then what is to be said about those supporting gay marriage? Also, if spending millions of dollars to support a viewpoint is wrong, what can be said about the money spent by supporters of gay marriage?

    Just a thought…

  • Bill_Perdue

    Religion is the enemy. Religion is humankinds greatest self imposed wound.

  • Whitewitch

    You are so right…and you educated me with your post and I really appreciate it. I hope that came across in my response and up vote. It is good for those who do know to share with those of us who were spared the “education”. Glad you are recovering!!!

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    As a recovering Catholic, there’s still a few years of Sunday School embedded in there somewhere. But I figure that their own esteemed texts are always going to be the best evidence against their own professed beliefs. They can claim one thing, but when the black and white text they’re using as their justification so easily contradicts them, it just proves they are all doing nothing better than making it up as they go along.

  • tedhayes

    Judicial tyranny occurs only when a judge hands down a decision with which the bigots disagree.

  • Whitewitch

    You could apologize that he didn’t come in a time when his words could be recorded or the fact that he did not make Mary clearly one of his apostle…but then those are really his fault I suppose. Then we are talking about an imaginary man….

  • Whitewitch

    Poor Mrs. Lincoln, can you imagine being her…living with a strange man – who you didn’t really choose as your “soul mate”, suffering from a bit of madness and loosing all of your children and your only protector (husband) and thrown to the wolves. I would not have been her for anything. And now we call her ugly…she was actually a handsome woman you know.

  • Whitewitch

    I too blame Humans…they are quite sad and I grieve to be one.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Seems to me we’re apologizing every day, with our tax dollars, for Jesus expelling the money changers from the temple. Do you suppose they were too big to fail back then too?

  • Whitewitch

    Psssstttt Naja…she was a woman, according to THEIR God that is the only thing she ha to do to be cursed by a God that hates women as much as the Republican Party does.

    Your story is very scary….so glad I have not read the bible thoroughly enough to even know this.

  • JONES

    Desert News is owned by the Mormon Church. So the ‘editorial’ viewpoint was to be expected. What was very surprising though was the depth to which the commenters went in siding with equality. They weren’t shy in showing compassion for equal treatment in both their hearts and under law. Goes to show you how very important it is to make the effort to talk to people and not at them. They listened and they really got it.

  • http://AMERICAblog.com/ John Aravosis

    Funny, because I don’t recall having to apologize for anything Jesus ever did.

  • http://AMERICAblog.com/ John Aravosis

    Please. We’re not new to this rodeo. Some of us have been following the Mormon stampede of hate for a few decades now. You folks have been spent millions in state after state trying to jam your beliefs down the throats of other Americans, and finally, after a very long while, Atlas Shrugged and now you’re paying the price with an awful lot of bad publicity. And I don’t really care what justification you have for trying to rip apart our marriages. You’re one of the most activist bigots out there – really as bad as the religious right, if not worse. And know that, whatever reasoning to come up with for why it is you’ve spent decades trying to hurt people, know that you will – and already are – being held accountable. If you want people to hate you, you’re doing a very good job. A little contrition wouldn’t kill you.

  • Whitewitch

    Snap Thom Allen – you have done such an excellent job – I need say nothing except – well done you sir, well done you.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Depending on which source you go to, Cain and Abel were each born with twin sisters. They were supposed to marry the other’s twin, but Cain wanted to keep his own twin sister for himself… thus sparking off the whole issue. Abel never married, and had no children. Cain was given his sister Awan when he was cursed. Makes you wonder what she ever did to deserve the same fate as Cain… but Seth, Adam and Eve’s third son, also married his sister, Azura, and lead to the line which percolates through the Old Testament as we know it. Seth’s son, Enos married his sister Noam. Enos’s son Cainan married his sister Mualet. After about five generations they were able to start marrying cousins instead of siblings. A long line of cozy incest, which probably should have changed the meaning of the word ‘beget’.

    The story of Jacob is quite twisted as well. In love with his cousin Rachel, but his uncle tricked him into marrying his other cousin, Leah. But eventually he married them both. Then he went on to marry two other women as well. One of which his son from his first wife also slept with. Seriously, the whole thing reads like a day time soap opera.

  • cantake8

    Here’s what I know about Mormons: they have such shitty lives they like to go around waking up people who partied the night before.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Pretty much. If the ruling had gone the other way they’d be laughing and declaring it to be gospel.

  • Mighty

    Judicial tyranny aka we don’t like the decision.

  • Thom Allen

    Julie is a woman. They aren’t allowed points.

  • Thom Allen

    Of course, WE don’t understand. The poor, beleaguered mormons. Always misunderstood and always correct. Tell you what, Julie, go to the temple basement and surreptitiously baptize all of us to mormonism. Maybe then we’ll understand. Oh, wait. You can’t baptize us. You’re just a woman. Not even equal in your oh-so-loving church. Just a handmaiden/wife/servant/childbearer. And you want to make all of us just like you – LESS THAN, NEVER EQUAL in the eyes of mormonism. No, thanks, Julie. Been there, done that hated it.

    I have a suggestion for you and your mormon co-cultistists. Some mormons fled the US previously when we said “no” to your cult’s polygamy preachings. If you don’t like same-sex marriage, might I invite you to head to Mexico? Just be careful where you settle there as same-sex marriages are legal and being performed in several places there, too.

  • WilmRoget

    Julia had no real point, just a smokescreen of lies and false accusations.

  • WilmRoget

    I suggest that you stop pretending that we don’t know why the Mormon’s oppose same-sex marriage – since they’ve been telling us for years now.

    ” I see why people might think that Mormons are “oppressors”, “bullies”
    or “hateful,” but those views clearly show an uniformed opinion of the
    religion.”

    False. By purposefully working to deny us our civil rights, including our right to live by non-mormon religious beliefs like ‘homosexuality is not sin’, the LDS absolutely are oppressors, bullies, and hateful.

    “If you want to know about Mormonism and our views on same-sex marriage, talk to a Mormon,”

    Since you just lied, and squandered your chance with those lies – we’ve already heard all of the lies.

  • pappyvet

    Exactly Rick , exactly !

  • Max_1

    Traditional marriage… One man and his harem?

  • nicho

    Why would I waste a minute researching a hate group like the Mormon cult? I know all I need to know about them.

  • Bomer

    How’s about you keep your religion to yourself? Like it or not this is a secular society with secular laws and neither your religion, nor that of anyone else, gets to pass laws based on their particular tenets. Don’t want to be called oppressors, or hateful, or bullies? Then mind your own business and keep your religion out of secular law.

  • cantake8

    Several, but one concept remains constant: MEN ARE SUPERIOR.
    When one thinks about it, Mormonism and Islam visions of the afterlife are eerily similar: one guy, LOTS of women. With Mormonism, the number of women is infinite, with Islam, all the women are virgins; but it’s still a heterosexual guy’s big wet dream.

  • http://twitter.com/rickroberts Rick Roberts

    Why should any of us care why Mormons oppose same-sex marriage? Mormon is not a state in the union. Utah is.

  • cantake8

    Much too limited: blame RELIGION and intellectually lazy humans.

  • cantake8

    That’s an interesting point: Bible-based religions are at their root FOUNDED IN INCEST.
    Adam & Eve had two sons, and the two sons had children. With whom did Cain and Abel procreate? Repeat after me: mutherfukkers!

    But don’t let that alone brand Bible religions, let’s look to husband and wife Abraham and Sarah who had the same father. When Sarah couldn’t conceive, she gave her female slave Hagar to Abraham. Incest and marital plurality, all blessed by God.

    Then there’s righteous Lot who led his wife and daughters out of Sodom & Gomorrah (after first offering his daughters to the crowds for sex). His wife turned into a salt lick, but not long after his daughters got him drunk and both slept with him in order to get pregnant and continue their family.

  • cantake8

    It is remarkable to listen to the attorneys who spearheaded the case against Proposition 8 outline how the opposition had NOTHING when it came to refuting arguments for marriage equality OR substantiating claims against equal rights to marry. After all these years they still walked into the court with “God said” and “it’s against the Bible.” News host Bill Moyers plays the devil’s advocate and the attorneys knock down all objections with absolute ease: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02262010/watch.html

  • pappyvet

    If you have found a path that gives you rest at night , I’m fine with it. Just keep it in your church. Do not try to impose your beliefs on others by spending millions to influence votes or for that matter since Utah is also a state in the United States , stop attempting to make your religion more important than the Union. As I have said , if you have found a path that works for you fine !
    I have found a path which gives me comfort , spiritual insight and peace. But the Mormon Church has repeatedly gone out of it’s way spending vast sums of money to turn it’s religious and personal beliefs into law. The biased views are clearly with the Mormon church.
    Keep your beliefs in your house , if I wish to join I will let you know.

  • cantake8

    Excellent!

  • cantake8

    “Mormon hating feminist wife”
    In one phrase your wife achieves not only superior intellect, but stellar humanity. Congratulations to her and to you for selecting such an excellent partner!

  • cantake8

    Why don’t YOU make the point? I don’t want to spend time researching LDS rules. Why can’t you just give it up?
    Screw Mormons and their quest for influence: they can have their marriages and Utah can have it’s higher-than-the-national-average divorce rate. But for some reason MARRIAGE is only “sacred” when gays and lesbians want it.

  • http://poodyheads.wordpress.com/ zorbear

    They have drugs for that now…
    ;-)

  • Julia Allred

    I suggest that the author and any other “Mormon basher” do some research and actually find out why Mormons appose same-sex marriage. I see why people might think that Mormons are “oppressors”, “bullies” or “hateful,” but those views clearly show an uniformed opinion of the religion. If you want to know about Mormonism and our views on same-sex marriage, talk to a Mormon, not an author who quite obviously does not know the truth in its entirety and is quick to call a group of people bigots. If you are writing an articled discouraging “bullying,” please don’t be a bully yourself by trying to degrading a religion with biased views and untruths.

  • samiinh

    From the Doctrine and Covenants:

    Section 132″Revelation given through
    Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843,
    relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of
    the marriage covenant and the principle of plural marriage.”

    Mormon leaders had another revelation in 1890 when they wanted to become a state that revoked the concept of plural marriage, however, they never to this day removed this from the book of rules. In 2013, to be a true believer, a Mormon must believe that plural marriage is God’s plan for mankind.

    So when they claim they believe that a marriage is between one man and one woman, they are lying and denying their founder and their doctrines.

  • bkmn

    I would love to know what percentage of gay Mormons wind up leaving their faith due to the crap treatment of them by the Mormon powers that be.

  • Kevin

    I really wish you had used wife #22 Lucy Bigelow, it is from her’s and Brigham’s union that my Mormon hating feminist wife descends. She is, of course, my favorite of the Brigham harem.

  • Monoceros Forth

    Why? History abounds with polytheistic societies who excelled at making their citizens’ lives miserable. Worshipping goddesses, for example, didn’t prevent the classical Greeks from creating some of the most sexist societies ever to exist.

  • chris10858

    AS the postcard says, karma’s a bitch, ain’t it? I think Utah now having to offer marriage equality to all Americans in their state is a sweeter bit of irony than any other state legalizing it.

  • Bomer

    When I was little in the late 70s early 80s we lived in a small Southern Arizona town that was largely Mormon. It was the worst kept secret there that quite a few of Mormon men had more than one wife.

  • pappyvet

    Exactly !

  • pappyvet

    Right John. Family associations were far more important. And women who showed their beauty outside the home were suspect. I believe it was a throwback to olden times when a woman of captivating beauty was often viewed as somehow on the cusp of evil. “When She gets behind closed doors,” was not just a song but a way of life.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    It’s far too easy to point at the hypocrisy of the early church founders, and they’ll just respond with “But we’ve changed!” It should be noted that there were still prominent members of the church practicing polygamy well into the 1940s. Some of the ones who were less than discrete about it were excommunicated, but the church, and the state, has really only ever made token efforts to stop the practice. Which is why the recent law suit was even possible. They have always intentionally left the door wide open.

  • angst in Berwyn

    History is riddled with religious cults started by guys looking for an excuse to cohabit and get it on with numerous women, usually at the expense of other men. Joseph Smith was only a more successful example. The Mormon Church now favors the right to limit marriage to a man and one woman because to go back to its roots of polygamist roots would be bad for the brand in the early 21st Century. A court tossed most of Utah’s anti-polygamy laws out a week before the similar ruling against its anti-gay marriage laws. But I feel they are using the “gay” side of the issue to make us forget about how Mormonism got started and how they’re trying to bury their own past.

  • Monoceros Forth

    Utah’s Amendment 3 may provide precisely the robust legal case that will, in the end, preserve to the states their right to define marriage to be exclusively between and man and a woman.

    Actually, I’m pretty sure that the bigots’ hope for a constitutional amendment is to evade the need for providing a “robust legal case” altogether.

  • http://AMERICAblog.com/ John Aravosis

    And the mid 1800s weren’t exactly an era known for letting women share their beauty publicly. They all look like Mrs. Lincoln, or worse because that’s what society wanted women to look like, I suspect. (And as noted, it doesn’t really matter what they looked like anyway :)

  • pappyvet

    I blame Humans for their infinite capacity to interpret their religions to include the right to harm those that walk a different path and feel righteous about the pain they cause.

  • MyrddinWilt

    I have been expecting a ‘revelation’ since the prop-hate fiasco blew up on them.

    The church used to be just as ardently committed to racism. Then someone got up out of bed one morning and announced he had been told it was all a big mistake.

    Its kind of like the communists who changed from thinking Hitler was evil incarnate to a great friend of socialist to evil incarnate again all on party orders.

  • Indigo

    I blame monotheism.

  • Indigo

    Mormonry and Scientology are the two financially stable religions invented by Euro-American bullies. I’m not sure what that says about spirituality but in both cases they seem to have taken Adam Smith seriously. Both illustrate the widely held assumption that all religions are entirely negative and haven’t done much to defuse that criticism.

  • pappyvet

    “I am leaving soon and you will forgive me if I speak bluntly. The Universe grows smaller every day — and the threat of aggression by any group — anywhere — can no longer be tolerated.
    There must be security for all — or no one is secure… This does not mean giving up any freedom except the freedom to act irresponsibly.” Klatuu

    The idea of Humanity has been twisted and toyed with since that noble concept was first imagined.

    Perhaps we need a Klatuu . Christianity , Islam , Judaism. All of these “major” religions seem to bring with them the prejudiced views and stone cold hatreds of the brute within mankind. I would that there was far more spirituality and a lot less religion. A lot more reaching for the higher ground and a lot less concerning themselves with condemning another’s path would lead to greater peace , greater knowledge , and a deeper understanding of the music of Life.
    In the case of the Mormons , the tree of hope still stands but the shrub of optimism is in dire need of food and sunshine.

  • nicho

    Yes. How many times exactly have the Mormons “redefined marriage?”

  • HJCOTTON

    that was zoo brilliant and informative.

  • Whitewitch

    I think he was just collecting property – I am not sure he actually exercised his rights for “fun”. Men and their property – you know.

  • cole3244

    like most cults there is a lot of mud to be removed from the mormons past and most likely future as well.

  • cole3244

    now now we all know all women are beautiful on the inside so lets not be catty.

  • nicho

    Either Brigham Young needed glasses — or he had a serious grudge against his dick.

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS