Oaks is in favor of religious freedom

[TheAzzuri]

also, one important distinction....catholic charities was going to be forced because they accepted state funds. They were on the state's dime, so they were under the state's thumb. when considered in this context, it is not shocking that the state would exercise some control over where the money goes.

If the Catholic Church stopped taking state cash, then the government would not be able to intervene.

the lds church does not accept state or federal aid, as far as I know. LA Ute would be the better definitive source on this.

But, doesn't LA's example show that they WOULD be able to intervene? I'm not rebutting, I'm asking.

[thesaint258]

Couldn't the church just have continued to preach their brand of the gospel and leave others to live their lives?

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.

[thesaint258]

D&C 134:4 We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others;

But is marriage a right?

[BlueHair]

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.

Do you think gay people would be more prone to divorce than straight people? I think the church should be encouraging gays to get married. They teach marriage brings stability. It would make sense that gays would spend more time at home with their families and less time at clubs if they were allowed to have a family.

[LA Ute]

also, one important distinction....catholic charities was going to be forced because they accepted state funds. They were on the state's dime, so they were under the state's thumb. when considered in this context, it is not shocking that the state would exercise some control over where the money goes.

If the Catholic Church stopped taking state cash, then the government would not be able to intervene.

the lds church does not accept state or federal aid, as far as I know. LA Ute would be the better definitive source on this.

I'm off to Mutual. More later. (I'm no big expert on this. BTW.)

[TripletDaddy]

But, doesn't LA's example show that they WOULD be able to intervene? I'm not rebutting, I'm asking.

Can't say without reading the case and the related dicta. What is the context of the ruling. I remember reading unruh during the summer of Prop 8, but don't recall specifics now.

I don't see how 9th Circuit Unruh would t have much sway in a Massachusettes adoption case. The facts aren't really analogous. If the LDS Adoptions started taking state or federal money, then for sure there would be a risk....which is why the Church would never take the funds.

My only point is that the citing of the Catholic Adoption case is a pretty weak boogeyman used by scaremongerers. Of course, these are the same folks that are citing a decline in heterosexual marriage in Denmark as proof of the ills of potential gay marriage in the US.

[fusnik]

Anyone else bothered that he would compare the plight of pre civil rights African Americans with that of the modern LDS family?

Can't wait to see the martyr card cranked up 150% at church on Sunday.

[SloanHater]

Anyone else bothered that he would compare the plight of pre civil rights African Americans with that of the modern LDS family?

Can't wait to see the martyr card cranked up 150% at church on Sunday.

That's not the analogy he was drawing. He is referencing voter intimidation.

"As such, these incidents of 'violence and intimidation' are not so much anti-religious as anti-democratic," he said. "In their effect they are like well-known and widely condemned voter-intimidation of blacks in the South that produced corrective federal civil-rights legislation."

[thesaint258]

Do you think gay people would be more prone to divorce than straight people? I think the church should be encouraging gays to get married. They teach marriage brings stability. It would make sense that gays would spend more time at home with their families and less time at clubs if they were allowed to have a family.

I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. I wasn't saying gay people will divorce more. I was saying that no-fault divorce was a change in how society deals with families, and it had some significant (IMO) consequences that weren't intended. Gay marriage is another change in how we deal with families, and I worry that there will be unintended consequences that will hurt families.

[thesaint258]

My only point is that the citing of the Catholic Adoption case is a pretty weak boogeyman used by scaremongerers.

I think this is the first time anyone's ever called me a scaremongerer.

[TripletDaddy]

I think this is the first time anyone's ever called me a scaremongerer.

nah, you are no scaremongerer. we are just having a discussion here, trying to flesh out some of these arguments.

[thesaint258]

nah, you are no scaremongerer. we are just having a discussion here, trying to flesh out some of these arguments.

I know, I was just playing. As a side note, part of the reason I like this forum is that everyone has the ability to have an actual discussion as opposed to the ability to state something and then cover one's ears and yell loudly.

[fusnik]

That's not the analogy he was drawing. He is referencing voter intimidation.

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

[TripletDaddy]

I know, I was just playing. As a side note, part of the reason I like this forum is that everyone has the ability to have an actual discussion as opposed to the ability to state something and then cover one's ears and yell loudly.

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.

[SloanHater]

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

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

After giving $10,000 to California's Proposition 8 campaign last year, Charles LiMandri began receiving some unexpected correspondence.

"I got about two dozen e-mails and hate phone calls," said Mr. LiMandri, who lives in San Diego. "They were calling me Nazi, homophobe, bigot. I tried to engage people once or twice - I said that Proposition 8 had nothing to do with being bigoted, it was about preserving marriage - but people don't want to engage on the issue."

As a lawyer, however, Mr. LiMandri knew what to do with the e-mails.

"I collected them and turned them in to the lawsuit," he said.

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