Prop 8 in California, Malignant and Mean, or Merely an Attempt at Securing the First Amendment?

  • 6packabs

    Posts: 216

    Nov 13, 2011 1:08 AM GMT
    Another post got me on this topic, and it is something I wanted to put out there for a time, and since composed, thought I'd put it up as a thread.

    And please, don't get hostile and vile if you disagree. People can be civil and emotionally stable in speaking of issues. This topic is not meant, by me, to be one to stir people up to anger. Therefore, please don't let yourself be so stirred if that would be your inclination.

    I had a Mormon bishop who told me he thinks the church will "soften in time" as relating to homosexuality. I was stunned, to say the least. I didn't believe him, though it was somewhat nice to hear of the possibility.

    Prop 8 in California, Church Attempting to Secure the 1st Amendment


    As for the Prop 8 deal, I think the LDS (Mormon) Church got a bad rap. Did the church move forth to have "domestic partnerships" and "civil unions" disbanded? No. Left that alone, which as one of the California Supreme Court justices cited, give gay people just as much right before the law as "marriage" does.

    From the Church's standpoint, the Prop 8 thing has to do with religious freedom and putting into law language the protects them. Remember the 1st Amendment to the Constitution? It begins---and this is rock bottom first thing in the Bill of Rights:

    1st Amendment, US Constitution:"Congress Shall Make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."


    Congress was forbidden to make laws regarding religion. But was there such a barring on the courts? Well, no, cause there was no reason to spell out a prohibition of lawmaking on the courts by the US Founders, for the courts weren't authorized to make laws. Yet today, courts do so all the time.

    With a Mormon background, I had ancestors murdered, left orphaned, hunted by dogs and federal marshals, houses burned, they were driven out of the boundaries of the United States, then later US Armies (Johnston's Army) marched into the Utah Territory with the intent to destroy the church or have it "comply" with "marriage" as the government wanted to define it.

    Sound Ironic? Sure. But think about it. It's not hypocritical as many would give a knew jerk reaction to say. I think Elton John had it right when on the Prop 8 issue, he said "give them the word marriage" and conceded it didn't change a damn thing for him in terms of his rights as a legal "domestic partner."

    Prop 8 will be overturned in time. The LDS church knows that. And mark my word, when it is overturned there will be lawsuits and court rulings coming against the church that are going to be in vicious violation of the 1st Amendment. The Mormon church will not be left to practice it's religion or marriage as it defines it (and marriage is a religious contract historically, not one by the state), but will be mercilessly persecuted as it was in the late 19th century. Eastern establishment folks were hostile to Mormons for their plural wives, which was only a minority of men who had such families, whereas the moralists back east in D.C. had their mistresses in many cases. All this helps us see what a joke it is to get up on our high horses in condemnation of each other, for we are all tainted, who is there without sin ready to cast forth the first stone, right?

    The answer?


    The truly righteous answer is to get the damned hand of government out of such affairs, get government back into its constitutional straightjacket. It is then churches could be free to do as they pleased without fear of the 1st Amendment needing additional protections in law, such as Prop 8 sought to do for church people not wanting to or believing in marrying gay couples in their temples and churches---a real fear that lawyers warn will be an issue down the road when Prop 8 is overturned.

    Gay churches can marry gay couples. Straight only churches can do as they please, and people can attend either or none. All are left free from government interferance and coercion. Such would be the ideal way, and the Constitutional way.

    That said, I concede today is complicated. Such things are no longer as black and white as they would seem, as there can be a role for the state in looking at the definition of marriage, as there are divorces, custody battles, etc. Yet, leave marriage as it is to the religionists, and give homosexual couples the full rights of the same through domestic partnerships---which is as it now stands, as the California judges acknowledged upon review of the prop 8 case.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2011 1:35 AM GMT
    6packabs saidGay churches can marry gay couples. Straight only churches can do as they please, and people can attend either or none. All are left free from government interferance and coercion. Such would be the ideal way, and the Constitutional way.

    That said, I concede today is complicated. Such things are no longer as black and white as they would seem, as there can be a role for the state in looking at the definition of marriage, as there are divorces, custody battles, etc. Yet, leave marriage as it is to the religionists, and give homosexual couples the full rights of the same through domestic partnerships---which is as it now stands, as the California judges acknowledged upon review of the prop 8 case.

    You and your bishop have things completely (and perhaps deliberately on his part) confused. No church in the US has the authority to convey legal marriage -- only the state does. Marriage does NOT belong to the religionists, it belongs to the people, and the state.

    No church wedding is legally valid without a state marriage license. And a marriage before a judge outside a church is perfectly legal. This is where the "religionists" you cite try to confuse things, creating this myth that marriage is a church institution, that it belongs to them, and only they can define it.

    What a church can be authorized to do is act on authority delegated from the state. The state grants the authority for the marriage, and permits an approved clergyman to conduct the ceremony. But a clergyman isn't needed at all -- a judge or other individual can be empowered to conduct the ceremony. If a religious group declines to recognize that marriage before a judge, of one of its own members, that's a matter for them to decide. But in the eyes of the state those people are legally married.

    Rather, what Prop 8 did was tell the state who it couldn't marry. Based on the wishes of the religionists, in compliance with their own religious doctrine. So that even a judge can't marry a gay person in his chambers. And that is a true violation of the separation of church & state, when the church campaigns and manages to enact it's own religious law as the law of the land.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2011 5:26 AM GMT
    The Mormon church has no issues with us poofters, it's the sexual act to two men getting it on together, that is against church rules, and just as the military have rules that many have dishonored, so do churches.

    I can not ever see the Church of Latter Day Saints, ever condoning gay sexual relationships, if ever; it's not what the religion is about.

    Now The Mormons are American born Religion, that the US once wanted to exterminate, and yes they are active in American politics, and pro active in passing prop 8. now thats all sweet and well, since it is an American born religion. But the US never exterminated them, as much as it tryed to. No now the Mormons have thrived so much they consider themselves a world Religion like Vatican City, thus feel they have a right from stopping us poofters down in Oz from having equality, I do draw a line there, it's bad enough this country being screwed over with Americanism, and cheap american oranges, but now it's religion feel they can screw us over too, enough is enough.

    When America stops having such a negative impact on my country, and culture, I'll stop haveing an opinion on America.

    No the Mormon church will never ever see a homosexual relationship as being equal to a man and women, but then nor does Owebama.

    Remember in America it is: In God We Trust been reinstated as the American logo too. Religion and state are a fare cry from being separate, even blind Freddie can see that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 13, 2011 5:33 AM GMT
    The Mormon chuch has a number of gay members and even more half brothers the bisexuals. This Bishope may of been one of them, and his view was just that his, and not that of the presidency of the chuch, and at the end of the day, that is the only opinion that counts in the chuch, not that of a bishop.