« Cheryl Crist | Chino Blanco's Blog | An invitation to show up or walk out on June 29th »

Mormons enter Calif. marriage fight


So says the Yahoo! News headline.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/po/mormonsentercalifmarriagefight;_ylt=Ao3UiXHep.KpFso3c06zFL2s0NUE


Church president Thomas S. Monson and his two top counselors call on Mormons to donate "means and time" to passing a constitutional ban Nov. 4.

A letter sent to Mormon bishops ... calls on Mormons to donate "means and time" to the ballot measure. A note on the letter dated June 20 says it should be read during church services June 29 ...
California Mormons -- there are more than 750,000, according to a church almanac -- have heard and heeded similar calls from their leaders before.
In 2000, a letter from the pulpit asked members to give time and money in support of Proposition 22, a ballot measure prohibiting California from legally recognizing gay marriages performed outside the state.


The blatant hypocrisy and shameless disregard for Mormon history shown by any LDS church leader or member who donates "means and time" to such efforts needs to be called out for what it is.

For those who've read articleman's post re Sen. Gordon Smith (R - OR), Gay Marriage, Early Mormons, and Davis v. Beason ... 

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/06/sen-gordon-smith-ror-gay-marri.php


... you might remember this quote from Sen. Smith:


"Part of what I fear, as you start defining marriage -- we have a long history of doing that in this country, and my Mormon pioneer ancestors were the victims of that. They were literally driven from the United States in the dead of winter for following their religious beliefs. I don't want that coming back."


I share your fear, Sen. Smith.  So, when are you and the leadership of your church gonna get out of the marriage-defining business?

Or are y'all still so traumatized from that 19th-century Establishment spanking of your naughty polygamous posteriors that you simply can't help yourselves when it comes to showin' the rest of America just how nice and assimilated you've become ... by gettin' out in front of the mob with your displays of disgust with the non-vanilla marriage flavor of our day.


A pox on all hypocrites.

Chino Blanco


56 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

There's a reason this topic is perpetually under discussion in the bloggernacle (the Mormon blogosphere): the leadership's anti-gay positions are cause for serious discomfort among thinking Mormons. Now it's the LDS leadership that needs to be discomfited.

user-pic

Just in case you didn't believe me about this bein' an endless topic of conversation among Mormon bloggers ... here they are pokin' fun at themselves and their proclivity:

Things We Can Argue About Other than Gay People

Here is a list of topics that we could argue about other than gay people, their marriages, and whether they have cooties.

http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2008/06/things-we-can-argue-about-other-than-gay-people/


user-pic

And just in case you come to this topic thinking that Mormons are a bunch of ignorant yahoos ... well, think again:

Institutional obsolescence, and other tales of romance and intrigue from the history book

http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=4586

user-pic

And then there was this monster thread ...

BYU Changes Honor Code Regarding Homosexuality

http://www.mormonmentality.org/2007/04/12/byu-honor-code.htm

user-pic

Gay Mormons Ask Church Leaders to Support Freedom and Equality in California

http://www.affirmation.org/media/2008_06_23.shtml

user-pic

Open Letter to California Mormons

http://www.affirmation.org/media/2008_06_24.shtml

user-pic

Affirmation Issues Statement on the May 2008 Ruling of the California Supreme Court

http://www.affirmation.org/media/2008_05_30.shtml

user-pic

Just in case some readers might've assumed my earlier reference to the bloggernacle was just some whimsical neologism of mine (Mormon Tabernacle + Blogosphere) ... no, it's real, it's out there, and Feminist Mormon Housewives is one of the better 'nacle sites:

http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/?p=1860

And the 'nacle itself is neatly aggregated here:

http://www.ldsblogs.org/

Just FYI.

user-pic

As long as I'm makin' introductions to the bloggernacle, this is what a 'conservative' 'nacle site looks like on the issue at hand (as opposed to a 'liberal' 'nacle site like FMH):

http://www.millennialstar.org/2008/06/24/supporting-the-churchs-position-on-ssm-part-2/

user-pic

http://origin.sltrib.com/news/ci_9674302

The LDS Church has been involved in the California effort to promote traditional marriage since 1998, when it spent $1.1 million to defeat proposals in Hawaii and Alaska. At the same time, LDS leaders in California urged members to support Proposition 22, a law that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. "We were asked to canvass neighbors, go door to door with the petition and ask for support," Russell Frandsen, a Latter-day Saint in southern California, told The Salt Lake Tribune in March. "A large number of us volunteered to do that. I suppose most of us did it out of a sense of responsibility."

The LDS have canvassed homes because of this issue. I'd suggest activists would do well to show up (preferably in Sunday best) outside LDS chapels on June 29th and politely ask Mormons to lay off the persecution.

Separation of church and state, as I've written before, is obviously not adhered to when the topics are marriage and abortion.
Gee, wonder if Romney is going to grab hold of this twister. Hmmm. Guess we'll find out soon enough.

user-pic

Romney created his own lil' dust devil with this formulation of his from that big important speech he gave way back when:

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom."

Huh? Not even Romney could explain what that was supposed to mean, because it wasn't intended to be understood as anything, other than a big pander-bear hug from the Mormon, to make religious folks feel like, no matter what their religious beliefs, they were doin' the country proud just by dint of believin' 'em. Romney simply wrote them a free pass 'cuz that's what allowed him to ask for one in return. No questions asked. Like it should be. 'Cuz we're free.

So, anyway, whatever Romney's next big job in politics might be, I don't think he's gonna do much to help us sort out any of this. He'll aim for the opposite of clarity whenever it suits him, and in his case, that's almost always.

user-pic

Romney on Falwell and the LDS ...

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/september/34.74.html

Q: How do you think relations between Mormons and Trinitarian Christians have changed during your lifetime?

A: I don't know that there's been a significant change relating to doctrine. [But] several months ago, not long before he died, I had the occasion of having the Rev. Jerry Falwell at our home. He said that when he was getting ready to oppose same-sex marriage in California, he met with the president of my church in Salt Lake City, and they agreed to work together in a campaign in California. He said, "Far be it from me to suggest that we don't have the same values and the same objectives."

Lovely.

user-pic

O/T, but I'm bummed I missed this:

Regina Thomas, LIVE-BLOGGING HERE! NOW!
http://www.eenrblog.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1834

Oh well, at least I can link to the conversation that was had with Regina.

Back to dissin' Mormons who oughta know better.

user-pic

While I'm O/T, might as well drop this in here on behalf of Cheryl Crist as well ...

______________________________

Hello, everyone! I am Cheryl Crist's campaign manager and I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for your support. We can feel that every day our campaign's momentum is building. Baird's vote on the FISA bill gave us a big boost over the weekend. We just attended the Clark County Democrats' Jefferson Jackson Dinner today, and the support for Cheryl was great!

Please continue to send what money you can. We have a relatively large district, geographically speaking, and with the high cost of gas it really ads up when going to events in every county. With your help, we can get some ads on the air, too!

If you live in the 3rd District, please join us in sign-waving and writing letters to the editor. We're also doing phone banking, tabling at farmers' markets and waving on street corners. There are lots of opportunities to contribute!

Thank you again, and keep spreading the word. We WILL replace a certain 'Bush Dog Democrat' this fall!

Best regards,
Kayla Saville
kayla@cristforcongress.us
www.cristforcongress.us

______________________________

GA-12 and WA-03 continue to be of interest. Cool.

user-pic

" ... a rather telling political ad for Gordon Smith, a Republican senator (although you wouldn't know it from this ad) representing Oregon:"

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=BF6B6ECEE972F1DC0C2FC78FFC498459?diaryId=6569

Maybe I should update Smith's quote from articleman's post:

"Part of what I fear, as you start defining Republicanism -- we have a long history of doing that in this country, and my Republican colleagues look set to become victims of that. They are gonna be literally driven from the United States Congress in the dead of winter for following their political beliefs. But me? Don't worry 'bout me. I've got Obama's back."

Or somethin' like that.

user-pic

O/T ...

Utah's Cannon out, Chaffetz in
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/2559/79577/480/541575

Some questions that came to mind after happening upon some alleged facts in comments at that dKos thread:

Is it true that Jason Chaffetz was once Utah state co-chairman of the Dukakis campaign?

Was his father really once married to Kitty Dukakis?

At this point, shouldn't liberals and conservatives both be equally tired of this kind of blatant bamboozlement?

Anyway, so does this mean that Bennion Spencer is our guy in UT-03?

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,5143,695262377,00.html

http://www.bennionspencerforcongress.com/

My favorite link on Spencer's site is the one that purports to answer the question: "What is a Democrat?"

Because I think I understand why it's there: plenty of folks in his district have probably never actually met one - a real live Democrat, that is.

user-pic

Utah Rep. Cannon ousted in Republican primary

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/06/utah_rep_cannon_ousted_in_repu.php

BROCK VERGAKIS
AP News
Jun 25, 2008 01:00 EST

Chaffetz will face Democratic candidate Spencer Bennion, a former television reporter, in the general election. In one of the nation's most conservative districts, the ex-BYU kicker is expected to easily cruise to victory.

The Dem candidate's name is Bennion Spencer.

Here's to hopin' that ain't the only thing Vergakis got wrong in this graf.


user-pic

Now that I'm done goofin' around, I'm gonna shush, and look forward to your comments.

I'd actually be deeply honored if any bloggernacle denizens were to show up here and grace TPMCafé with their thoughts on this topic.

user-pic

Before I shush, let me present that invitation to the bloggernacle in the form of a question (since I was admittedly all over the place up top, as usual):

If, as with Prop. 22, LDS church members in California are again asked to canvass their neighbors in support of the church's position against gay marriage, what view would you take of activists on the other side of this issue who might deem it fair play to mobilize and park themselves outside LDS chapels on June 29th in a show of disagreement with your church's position?


Ain't part of the bloggernacle, but I believe in live and let live. What gays and lesbians choose to do is no disgrace to my marriage. What my wife chose to do is another matter.

user-pic

For what it's worth, I've enjoyed reading your posts here. Cold comfort, I know.

Could someone check the queue for lost comments? I submitted one several hours ago, and it's not showing. If it didn't go through, I guess I should resubmit.

user-pic

Hey, Lila, if Kaimi's comment is stuck in moderation, pls release it. Whatever Professor Wenger has to say, I'd be totally thrilled to see him weigh in here.

Otherwise, Kaimi, pls resubmit. My ranting aside, I'd hoped that this thread might become an opportunity to hear from faithful, thoughtful Mormons on this issue ... and after all my trash-talkin', it's not as if it's gonna clutter the place up if your comment happens to post twice.

"it's not as if it's gonna clutter the place up if your comment happens to post twice."

Clearly, you haven't seen the comment yet. (grin).

I'll fire in a resubmit from my Word copy. (I wonder if it got flagged because it has several links -- I know Akismet sometimes flag those kinds of comments at my own blogs.)

user-pic

No, you can't go laying blame on Akismet for this one. The weird glitch we have here at TPM is that you've got to first recommend my post before your comment will be allowed to appear.

I know, like I said, it's weird. But there it is.

Chino, they screen out posts with multiple links. She can get around that by breaking it into multiple posts, but don't put more than one link in at a time.

user-pic

Hey, thanks for that. Good to know. Still, I liked my explanation better ... ;-)

By the way, what do you think of all this?

Well, when in Rome . . .

Hope it works this time. If not, hey, I'll just blog it myself.

user-pic

And we Romans are inveterate liars. Don't mind me, just post already.

user-pic

As long as I'm hangin' out here, thought I'd pass the time and link to the latest from the bloggernacle:

California, Homosexuality and my Baptismal Interview

http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/?p=1879

The worm is turning, folks. Because too many of us are too decent at heart for the charade to continue .

I will not be silenced! Live free or die!

Um, so, I give up. I went ahead and posted a version of my comment over at By Common Consent. It's at http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2008/06/same-sex-marriage-and-hypocrisy/ . Block that one, punks.

Now, I'm going to go storm the barricades. Liberte, fraternite, etc.

user-pic

Hey, I guess it's my turn to get blocked! My comments ain't showin' up at BCC, so I'm gonna drop my latest reply in here:

Here's my take so far after reading your post:

RAF: Mormon defense of "traditional marriage" is problematic. (agreed)

Kaimi: Opposition to polygamy is just as problematic for gay marriage advocates. (agreed)

LDG: The LDS Church has decided to play offense on the gay marriage issue because, let's face it, a problematic defense of "traditional marriage" is still a defense. Were polygamy to become legal, well, I think the term is "instant nostalgia" ... (agreed? I don't know, but it's an interesting take on this)

So, yeah, hypocrisy on both sides, but I'm wonderin' if LDG hasn't hit on what's really behind the LDS Church's actions on this issue?

Also, I'm wonderin' - settin' aside talkin' 'bout "hypocrisy" for a moment - if anyone here might be interested to answer the question I invited the bloggernacle to answer?

If, as with Prop. 22, LDS church members in California are again asked to canvass their neighbors in support of the church's position against gay marriage, what view would you take of activists on the other side of this issue who might deem it fair play to mobilize and park themselves outside LDS chapels on June 29th in a show of disagreement with your church's position?

That's not meant to sound belligerent. I think it's a fair question to ask.

user-pic

These Morons want to prove that they're traditional marriage types. They're using their bigoted opposition to same sex marriage to create distance between themselves and polygamy.

Bigotry in the service of religion is still bigotry.

user-pic

I'd agree that it ends up looking like a transparent attempt to build up traditional marriage cred.

At the same time, I wonder how gay marriage advocates might view the suggestion that their efforts are helping clear the way for the eventual legalization of polygamy? The recent California decision came with a footnote meant to reassure folks that it was not opening that door. I don't buy it and I wonder why it was necessary? I put 19th-century opposition to polygamy (which has carried through to today unabated) in the same bigotry basket as our waning 21st-century opposition to gay marriage. Bigotry, whether in the service of religion or in the service of the Establishment that Scalia types work to defend, is still bigotry, isn't it?

user-pic

I agree with you entirely. I have no problem with polygamy between consenting adults. It's none of my business.

But for mainstream Mormons who want distance from fringe Mormon polygamists, equating the two is good politics in another way: rather than framing the comparison as one of consenting adults doing what they want to do without harming anyone else, they frame it as a confluence of dangerous fringe cultures and, indeed, cults. A cynical and also successful ploy.

user-pic

Well said. And I think you'd find plenty of mainstream Mormons who share our disdain for the cynical politics that looks to be driving LDS actions on the issue of gay marriage.

Sheesh. Akismet = on drugs. Kind of puts a damper on discussion.

Your comments are now out of the cage at BCC; we'll see if our Akismet filter eventually decides you're not a spammer.

user-pic

Thanks, and thanks again for jumping in and making this interesting. I think I've still got two comments stuck in Akismet, but I see the first two got through. Cheers.

user-pic

Heh, at first glance I thought the headline was:

Morons enter Calif. marriage fight

My bad. I think

user-pic

Plenty of Mormons I know plan to vote for Obama. I'm not holding that up as proof of anything, but it does give me hope that we might be gettin' closer to bein' able to have discussions about topics like this without goin' all toxic on each other.

user-pic

I agree with this Mormon commenter about what an effective action might look like:

http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2008/06/same-sex-marriage-and-hypocrisy/#comment-184308

However, if, on the first Sunday of July, gay people would organize so a few gay families with children would show up to every ward in Cali, and then, during testimony time, one would get up and briefly say: “Hi. I’m not a member of your church, but I am impressed with what nice people you all are, and what beautiful families you have. That’s why I cannot understand why your leaders would encourage you to vote for a measure that would hurt MY family. I hope you don’t,” and then sit down, or leave with their children, then they would–I think–make both a powerful protest and a very good argument. It would change some minds.
user-pic

Tying up some loose ends ...

Here's the actual letter:

http://mormonstories.org/other/08028_00.pdf

I'm disappointed to see the overtly political message contained in this letter. And it makes several questionable assertions that would've been best avoided. Mormons deserve better leadership than this - they at least deserve not to be taken for fools and now they're gonna be stuck with a leadership that I'm afraid is gonna look terribly foolish and terribly uninspired after this gets decided. What a mess.

http://mormonmatters.org/2008/06/21/news-flash-lds-church-will-be-actively-opposing-gay-marriage-in-california-this-november/

user-pic

In addition to possible non-member actions to counter this move by the LDS Church, there's this advice for members from Phouchg at Mormon Matters:

I would urge those of us on this side of the issue who live in California do what I am planning on doing Sunday at sacrament meeting. When the letter is being read, simply walk out of the chapel and return a little later on in Sacrament meeting.

Simple, quiet, effective.


user-pic

This coming Sunday, June 29, in California….
http://theculturalhall.com/?p=244

user-pic

Note for when this all assumes its dKos diary form ...

It's worth mentioning that BCC deserves some serious credit. The site would seem to provide pretty good evidence that there are faithful Mormons who're unafraid to openly deal with this PR disaster.

user-pic

And another (more substantial) log gets tossed into the flames ...

http://messengerandadvocate.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/california-saints-to-get-the-call/

user-pic


http://mormonmatters.org/2008/06/21/news-flash-lds-church-will-be-actively-opposing-gay-marriage-in-california-this-november/#comment-20559

An unpopular minority - Mormons – trying to limit the rights of another unpopular minority – Gays - on an issue - Marriage - which Mormonism has a somewhat vexed (and very very famous) history, reminds all and sundry about said vexed history, is on the wrong side of history (again – see any number of issues, but perhaps blacks and the priesthood is the closest), hurts the reputation of the church in society at large, does nothing to lessen the distrust of the church felt by the Evangelicals who are the main supporters of the amendment, and in my admittedly brainless conclusion, is the exact opposite of what the church should be doing. The church did change their mind on oral sex, solely because of the outrage of the members; it could happen again.
user-pic

http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/?p=1881#comment-435187

However, if it was announced tomorrow that the U.S. government was going to cut off all foreign aid to development efforts, I don’t see the FP sending a letter asking all of us to contact our legislators.

Exactly. If I had the choice to spend $5 million on political lobbying efforts against same-sex marriage versus $5 million on food and medical supplies, I’d choose to feed hungry children.

The Church is free to send out press releases and publicize its position against same-sex marriage. But asking members to spend their time and money lobbying against same sex marriage when they could be volunteering at a local school teaching children to read, or working in a homeless shelter is an unfortunate allocation of resources.

Furthermore, I don’t understand why the Church chooses to engage in a high-profile fight in California, while it remained silent and did not join in the coalition of organized efforts to stop gay marriage in Massachusetts. If gay marriage is such a dangerous threat to our social institutions, the Church should be fighting it whereever it rears its ugly head.

Comment by ECS


user-pic

http://mormonmatters.org/2008/06/21/news-flash-lds-church-will-be-actively-opposing-gay-marriage-in-california-this-november/#comment-19664

I find it rather interesting that the letter is specifically to be read on June 29th, which is recognized in the GLBT community as “Pride Day,” the anniversary of the Stonewall riots. It COULD have been read tomorrow, June 22nd, but they’ve chosen a specific date, in a way which seems deliberately provocative.

Two things stand out in the letter, making me wonder just a bit about its authenticity:

(1) The language about “revers[ing] the vote of the people” seems unusually political (for lack of a better term) for a FP letter. On the other hand, it is taken almost verbatim from the recent evangelical ex-gay propaganda, which LDS leaders have closely parrotted for the past several years.

(2) The whole “Local church leaders will provide information about how you may become involved” passage seems to conflict with other post-2000 communications, which have tended more to explicitly deny “official” participation while encouraging individuals to jump on the bandwagon.

If this letter is genuine, it PUTS THE LIE to the recent LDS Public Relations spin, wherein they claimed that the twice-read 2006 letter to “make your opinion known” was not a direction to LDS members to “support” a constitutional amendment.

How many more Stuart Matis incidents do LDS leaders need, before they rethink these political crusades?

user-pic
user-pic
user-pic

July 15th update: My wild guess is that Obama's gonna win big in California this November. If I'm right about that, I have to wonder what Jeff Flint, co-campaign manager for the California Protection of Marriage initiative (the Yes on 8 side), thinks he's accomplishing by posting comments like these over at his place at the Red County blog:

I'm for change....blah blah blah...I's for bringing people together...blah blah blah...let me quote Obama some more....blah blah blah....

As a partner at Schubert Flint Public Affairs, and as "one of the most widely respected public affairs and political professionals in the state of California" (according to the Schubert Flint website), you'd think he'd be savvy enough to avoid

a) pissing off California's Obama supporters, and

b) sounding like a 12-year-old Al Jolson.

If this is the best PR that the ProtectMarriage.com coalition money can buy, well, then it's already time to put a fork in Yes on 8, because it's done.

user-pic


http://www.redcounty.com/placercountyca/2008/07/brown-press-release-look-at-me/#c68661

JEFF FLINT SAID:

I'm for change....blah blah blah...I's for bringing people together...blah blah blah...let me quote Obama some more....blah blah blah....

JULY 15, 2008 11:10 PM

Leave a comment

Chino Blanco

user-pic

Following: 24
Followers: 7

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address