Same-sex marriage coming to Utah

[SeattleUte]

I would be a terrible general authority in the new Church. Way too much vengeance in my blood. I would have been more effective in the Earth's infancy, a mere few thousand years ago.

Then you must not be a Christie for president guy.

[Sleeping in EQ]

hmm, interesting thought. Perhaps the new common consent is the membership moving one way and SLC with its marketing research tools discovers the shift and then figures out how to get in line with the common consent without losing face.

That is exactly what I have in mind.

[byu71]

uh, I actually think that would be a horrible model for common consent. I'd rather see it come about as it is described in the D&C and as it was practiced in the early church.

Odd, I never heard about how common consent worked in all the years I have been a member. That or I just didn't pay attention. The only thing I heard is everyone is asked to raise their hand, but it really doesn't matter as you can't vote down what has been directed by the leaders.

Can a 4 sentence summary be given on how it works? If not I will go look it up. Interesting.

[TripletDaddy]

Then you must not be a Christie for president guy.

It is going to take more than a few traffic jams to get to my level of vengeance. Christie is a lightweight (possibly the only time that has ever been said, btw).

[Jacob]

http://edwardschiappa.com/uploads/SchiappaAA.pdf

The link didn't work for me. But looks like that was in reference to the case before the California Supreme Court prior to Prop 8. Their ruling was based on the California Constitution to avoid their ruling being reviewable by the Supreme Court of the US. So, the poor reasoning could not be challenged.

In any case, once you reach the conclusion that gays are a protected class and that gay marriage is the same as marriage and that procreation is irrelevant to marriage, then it is pretty easy to reach the conclusion, as many here have, that there is no rational basis to withhold a marriage license from a willing gay couple. The bad arguments you mock are unfortunately the result of living in a world where some judges have already reached the above conclusions. But it is the legal reasoning that leads to those conclusions that is wanting.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Jacob reminds me of that Japanese soldier they found hiding in the jungle on some remote island in the Philippines. The war had been over for decades, but he was still fighting away.

[Jacob]

Jacob reminds me of that Japanese soldier they found hiding in the jungle on some remote island in the Philippines. The war had been over for decades, but he was still fighting away.

I don't care who wins the war. I'm worried about the battle being fought without honor.

[old_gregg]

I don't care who wins the war. I'm worried about the battle being fought without honor.

[pellegrino]

I don't care who wins the war. I'm worried about the battle being fought without honor.

lol, wth does that even mean?

[Donuthole]

lol, wth does that even mean?

It means Jacob has a sense of humor, contrary to popular board opinion. Of course some of us have known that all along.

[cougjunkie]

I don't care who wins the war. I'm worried about the battle being fought without honor.

Jacob hates gays. I don't blame you, most of the people that post here hated them to a few years ago. Times are changing, my grandma used to also hate blacks.

You will come around, my grandma still uses the words "colored" and "negro" from time to time. I am sure you will still use "fag" and "queer" but your hatred will die down when you realize you are fighting the battle alone, hers did.

[Moliere]

well, the temple recommend question is obviously very broad, but even your view seems to be contrary to the Church's position. To say that gays should legally engage in marriage is contrary to what the Church says.

I just don't see any convincing way around it. Ultimately, it doesnt matter too much. My main point was that SMR was doubtful that the question would even need to be asked. I think it is a fair question within the current construct of the temple recommend interview.

My personal opinion is that more and more bishops feel similarly which is why they wont press the issue. The question is too broad and would implicate everyone in some way or another over one issue or the next.

I've got to renew my recommend in the next couple months. I'm pretty sure my leaders know I support SSM, at least the person who will be handling my interview knows my position. I'll return and report.

[PaloAltoCougar]

I've got to renew my recommend in the next couple months. I'm pretty sure my leaders know I support SSM, at least the person who will be handling my interview knows my position. I'll return and report.

Assuming you're not asked any questions about porn usage, you'll be fine. I renewed my temple season tickets last week, despite having said multiple times in the course of teaching Gospel Doctrine and Gospel Principles that I'm fine with gay marriage, and I declined the invitation to chip in for Prop. 8. As reported previously, while sitting next to our stake president a few months ago I stated to about thirty others I thought Brigham Young was a racist. I have yet to raise an eyebrow among the local leadership, much less be challenged for my views.

[Moliere]

Assuming you're not asked any questions about porn usage, you'll be fine. I renewed my temple season tickets last week, despite having said multiple times in the course of teaching Gospel Doctrine and Gospel Principles that I'm fine with gay marriage, and I declined the invitation to chip in for Prop. 8. As reported previously, while sitting next to our stake president a few months ago I stated to about thirty others I thought Brigham Young was a racist. I have yet to raise an eyebrow among the local leadership, much less be challenged for my views.

True, but you are also a big donor...

[wuapinmon]

I don't care who wins the war. I'm worried about the battle being fought without honor.

Honor? Thomas Hobbes defined honor as pride that too often leads to bloodshed. There's no honor in honor for honor's sake.