Oaks is in favor of religious freedom

[cowboy]

So Mormons have had hounds unleashed on them and fire hoses turned on them to intimidate them from voting?

No, but from what I understand they have been the target of economic retaliation that has forced some small businesses to fold. Would you rather be hosed down for supporting a cause or lose your life savings?

[fusnik]

Not only that, but they've also been the victims of Google Maps.

My father gave a donation to Planned Parenthood to purchase some medical equipment about four years ago. About every other month he receives mail calling him and my mom baby killers and letters with graphic pictures of aborted and mutilated fetuses.

Was this not to be expected when the church left it's large monetary fingerprint on the Prop 8 decision?

[Solon]

No, but from what I understand they have been the target of economic retaliation that has forced some small businesses to fold. Would you rather be hosed down for supporting a cause or lose your life savings?

Historical analogies rarely work very well, but there is a lot of mudslinging against LDS as a church and LDS individuals: http://www.californiansagainsthate.com/

I'm not sure where intimidation begins and transparency ends (or something like that) but there's definitely a hostile vibe.

[SoonerCoug]

Maybe Elder Oaks is speaking out against hatred of Mormons because it was his idea to get Mormons involved in the Prop 8 campaign. Maybe it's an "Oh no! Look what our decision led to!" type of reaction.

[SloanHater]

My father gave a donation to Planned Parenthood to purchase some medical equipment about four years ago. About every other month he receives mail calling him and my mom baby killers and letters with graphic pictures of aborted and mutilated fetuses.

Was this not to be expected when the church left it's large monetary fingerprint on the Prop 8 decision?

Expected, Sure. Does the expectation of retaliation in any way justify it?

[RobinFinderson]

Wow! Elder Oaks is really doubling down on the church owning this issue. I think the church is digging itself a really deep pit here. The serious danger here is that the church will get so wedged into this issue, and public opinion will leave the church so far behind, that the church's capacity to grow (externally) and/or do good will be seriously diminished.

[SoonerCoug]

Wow! Elder Oaks is really doubling down on the church owning this issue. I think the church is digging itself a really deep pit here. The serious danger here is that the church will get so wedged into this issue, and public opinion will leave the church so far behind, that the church's capacity to grow (externally) and/or do good will be seriously diminished.

I agree. The more they talk about it, the more difficult it will be to reverse their position (which will inevitably happen).

On a side note, I would like to challenge you for title of second place apostate.

[Tim]

Not only that, but they've also been the victims of Google Maps.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ors-file-suit/

I love it when people say their support for Prop 8 was about "preserving marriage." I haven't seen those people mobilizing themselves to fight heterosexual divorce, infidelity in marriage, pre-marital sex. I might even suggest that if a law was proposed making divorce illegal, most Mormons would oppose it. The fight to "preserve marriage" is nothing more than a cover, maybe even a subconscious one, for supporting anti-gay policy.

[Flystripper]

No, but from what I understand they have been the target of economic retaliation that has forced some small businesses to fold. Would you rather be hosed down for supporting a cause or lose your life savings?

Economic retaliation is 100% appropriate and is wonderful in a free market of goods and ideas.

[Tim]

From the Church's perspective, I don't think they could have. The Church places a ton of emphasis on the importance of the family. When I think about homosexual marriage, I think about several books and articles I read a couple years ago on no-fault divorce. At the time, no-fault divorce was a solution to divorce cases taking a lot more time and costing a lot more money than they do now. No-fault divorces were supposed to help cut down on time and money spent and on the trauma the parties and their families endured. The consequences of no-fault divorce, however, has hurt families. It's made it easy for parents to just break up families, leaving kids more alone (one parent's gone and the other has to work), not to mention the psychological turmoil kids go through. (I'd like to point out that I'm not passing judgment on divorce--I believe there are good reasons to get divorced. I'm just passing on what the literature I read said.) No-fault divorce is separating people more and more. I wonder if allowing homosexual marriage will have unintended consequences like no-fault divorce did and further separate people.

I don't think the Church views this as isolated to particular individuals. I think it believes that such a huge change will affect all of us, and we all get to have a say in what happens.

It's a stretch to compare no-fault divorce (families splitting up) to homosexual marriage (families being started).

[BlueHair]

I love it when people say their support for Prop 8 was about "preserving marriage." I haven't seen those people mobilizing themselves to fight heterosexual divorce, infidelity in marriage, pre-marital sex. I might even suggest that if a law was proposed making divorce illegal, most Mormons would oppose it. The fight to "preserve marriage" is nothing more than a cover, maybe even a subconscious one, for supporting anti-gay policy.

I couldn't agree more. Prohibiting gay marriage preserves a definition in a dictionary. Nothing more. It has no effect one way or the other on traditional marriage. I'm quite sure I'm not going to leave my wife just because two dudes get married.

[TripletDaddy]

I agree. The more they talk about it, the more difficult it will be to reverse their position (which will inevitably happen).

On a side note, I would like to challenge you for title of second place apostate.

A serious question for those that were old enough to remember (no age jokes, please)......creekster, PAC, LA Ute, BYU 71, and anyone else I may have left out....

what was the vibe in the 70s? This is pre-1978, but post Civil Rights Act? How did the Church address the blacks issue amongst the members? Was the debate as divided as we see here on CUF? Was there much open dissent?

Also, speaking as honestly as you can, was the popular sentiment amongst the rank and file faithful a "I can't see God ever changing his position on this issue.....blacks have the curse of cain" sort of thing?

I am not asking you to abandon your current stance on gay marriage, but as an educational exercise, what parallels can you draw between the current debate over homosexuality and the then "hot debate" re: race?

I am asking this sincerely as a means of tapping into actual firsthand accounts, so I will respectuflly ask our beloved imp that if he wishes to participate (and frankly, I hope he does), please do so without devolving into some crazy diatribe. Again, I am asking for specific sentiments, for parallels, not apologetics nor personal attacks on the Church, per se.

[thesaint258]

It's a stretch to compare no-fault divorce (families splitting up) to homosexual marriage (families being started).

Why? Both are about how we treat families.

[TheAzzuri]

I wonder when we will start seeing reliable (or any) data from Boston reflecting the actual impact of the legalization of gay marriages. Thus far, pretty much all of the support against legalization has been either conjecture or anecdotal (hetero marriage rates in Europe, kids will be confused in school, etc).

Does any such data from Mass. exist yet? I haven't seen any statistics or figures.

Studies like this are usually done over the course of years. It could be a while.

[byu71]

A serious question for those that were old enough to remember (no age jokes, please)......creekster, PAC, LA Ute, BYU 71, and anyone else I may have left out....

what was the vibe in the 70s? This is pre-1978, but post Civil Rights Act? How did the Church address the blacks issue amongst the members? Was the debate as divided as we see here on CUF? Was there much open dissent?

Also, speaking as honestly as you can, was the popular sentiment amongst the rank and file faithful a "I can't see God ever changing his position on this issue.....blacks have the curse of cain" sort of thing?

I am not asking you to abandon your current stance on gay marriage, but as an educational exercise, what parallels can you draw between the current debate over homosexuality and the then "hot debate" re: race?

I am asking this sincerely as a means of tapping into actual firsthand accounts, so I will respectuflly ask our beloved imp that if he wishes to participate (and frankly, I hope he does), please do so without devolving into some crazy diatribe. Again, I am asking for specific sentiments, for parallels, not apologetics nor personal attacks on the Church, per se.

I can only speak of course of my experience. Prior to the late sixties, I don't remember much debate at all. I remember my Dad being very adamant against racists. He served in the military with black's and had nothing but good to say about them. At the same time he was a very faithful member of the church and we had Gospel Doctrine in the home. I didn't think to quiz him on a conflict.

I developed some prejudices in the mission field due to experiences during the race riots in Detroit and Cinncinnati. Came home to Cal. where my parents moved to and one of my younger brothers best friends was black. Great kid.

I reconciled myself to the fact I believed the church was led by a Prophet of God and I didn't have to have a answer to my satisfaction. I also felt if he wasn't God's Prophet then those not having the Priesthood weren't really missing out on anything anyway.

I can see how some looking back called it racism. However, I knew many, many members of the church and they weren't racist. That is why I get offended when some refer to "mormons" back then as racists. I take it personally as if they are calling my father, my brother and many others racists. They weren't.

I personally don't relate the two issues, black and the priesthood and gay marriage. I know others don't agree, but arguements on this board to date have not convinced me I am wrong.