Was just flipping through the channels on our Dish to see what was on this evening (not much). Came across a documentary about our church and it’s so called “stance” against the rights of homosexuals. My wife decided to watch it, but I wasn’t interested.
Gee, what interesting timing with this piece of misinformation, with the election only ten days away.
But just to educate, the church’s backing of California’s Proposition 8 has absolutely nothing to do with trying to disenfranchise the rights of homosexuals. Rather, the primary purpose was to try to prevent the state or feds from dictating who church ministers of any religion could or could not marry. And if anyone has any doubts about such a thing happening, witness the recent brouhaha about Obamacare forcing the Catholic Church to fund abortions through it’s health plans.
It seems that separation of church and state works only to keep the church from influencing state matters, but often the state takes the liberty of interfering with church matters. And that’s why the LDS Church publicly took the stand it did for Prop. 8, despite knowing the firestorm of criticism it would face. It, and any other church sharing its positions on this subject, should not be ashamed for interpreting scripture as it was written, not how the modern world would want them to.
And to be honest here, same-sex marriage is something that I’m still very mixed on. I realize that I’m opening my little sheltered corner of the blogosphere up to serious controversy here, but I’m afraid that down the road we may be dealing with untold long-term consequences from same-sex marriage on a large scale, concerning the definition and functions of the family unit. Or worse yet, a depopulation of an entire society, much like Italy and Japan who are facing near-zero birth rates and aging populations for reasons totally unconnected to the current issue being discussed. These things cannot be discounted once we start experiencing them.
But before I get denounced as another homophobe, I will share that I have a brother in California that is legally married to another man, as the law allowed at the time. Though admittedly it took me a little time to get used to, I totally accept them as a couple and gladly include them as a part of my life and my family. I actually find my brother’s husband to be an easier person to get along with than my own brother, or particularly the asswipe my SIL’s married to, and have no problem calling him a brother-in-law, or an uncle to our AJ. If that makes me hypocritical, so be it. Call it my preferential treatment of family members.
Seriously, though, I see the underhanded and sneaky attacks on our church as more pre-election tactics to try to discredit Romney. Fortunately though it seems like most the public, even those totally ignorant of the LDS church and everything it stands for, is seeing these attacks for what they are rather than lending much credence to them, other than the most hopelessly weak-minded and ignorant. I mean, if even Billy Graham can overcome his distaste for Mormons enough to endorse Romney, you know the Obamites are resulting to desperate measures to counterflood their increasingly listing ship.
Anyway, that’s my religious and political rant for the evening. Possibly a few more to come before the election. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
UPDATE: For mary_m_garner_uw19@lycos.com at IP address 96.44.189.102: Your comment got caught in my spam filter because it showed up with a header that looked very much like spam, and I accidentally trashed it. Though I can’t recover it I did find it within my cache and read it, and now regret my decision to hastily delete it. For this I apologize. If you read this again, feel free to resubmit your comment or do a new one. I didn’t dump it because it dissented with mine and my regular readers’ views, for respectful disagreement goes a long way with me. Just be sure to use a header that doesn’t look like spam, and I’ll try to be more careful as well. Okay?
As a rule, I avoid anything that connects politics with religion. Way too tough to wade through that stuff. As for same sex marriage, given that we already face a near 50% divorce rate, I don’t see how they can, in any way, harm the institution of traditional marriage. But I also believe that not everyone has to agree with me.
I’ll be so happy to see November 6th!! The RNC and various campaigns call and email two to three times a day wanting money. Their “goal” hasn’t been reached! Really? FIVE days before the election??
Sorry to rant… I’ve taken to unplugging my phone…
I know little to nothing about the Mormon church, but I don’t need to, to know that Mitt Romney is a smart businessman who will turn us around and head us in the right direction.
And yes, the fed dictating anything to a religious body is totally wrong and must be stopped.
I find that I am an enigma most of the time. On the one hand, I believe marriage is a legal matter. You cannot get married without legal papers, which makes it a legal matter. Therefore, a man can marry a man, or a woman can marry a woman through any ordained person or justice of the peace.. It’s just legal-eez. However, I also believe that churches believe differently and if they do not wish to marry a couple for whatever reason, they do not have to. It’s their church, their belief system.
I am not a big fan of Romney. But I am an even lesser fan of Obama.
It has more to do with America’s standing in the world and economics than an individualistic stance on gay marriage and abortion.
Individual freedoms will mean nothing if this great country goes down the shitter.
Dave, I am not a Mormon, but I do have many Mormon buddies. I understand the basics of it. I’m just a regular old plain vanilla protestant Christian. Romney’s Mormonism never bothered me. In fact, I forcefully supported him in 2008 when the McCaniac got swamped. Looking back it was probably for the best. Had Mitt lost to ObozO (and he probably would have…that was a freight train that I don’t think anybody could stop), he’d likely not be the nominee this time around.
I always figured Mitt would be the nominee this time. As the fortunes of Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich, even Santorum rose in the primary season, I always maintained that Mitt would be the nominee, and give us the best chance to get rid of the clowns in charge now.
As to gay marriage. Well, I’m an odd bird, I guess. I’ve actually come to conclude that the State sanctioning of any kind of marriage is not what should be happening. If I was the king of the forest…each State would establish their own laws about domestic partnerships…it could be a man and a woman/man and man/woman and woman/whatever that would enter in to a legal contract (which is really what most “marriages” are anyway) giving rights and benefits/community property/etc. to either of the partners. Each State would set their own rules…and would not be bound by the rules of other States. Tough cookies!
“Marriage” in my book is an entirely different thing. I honestly believe that REAL marriage can only happen between two believers in God. Those two (a man and a woman, btw…) must go before God, in the presence of witnesses, vowing their eternal devotion, and asking His sanctification of the union. I don’t think you’d really even need a minister of a church to “perform” anything if the couple so chose. The vows, and the sincere prayers for God’s blessing on the union/sanctification, etc. is what truly accomplishes “Holy Matrimony.”
Then, if that couple also wants to enter in to a State Sanctioned legal contract…well, so be it.
It’ll never happen. Legislators love to monkey with the strings…and Judges think they are gods…but I can dream.