Wish for no future Proposition 8

[_ajax18]

How do you know that will never happen? Do you think the government would have taken action against the Church if they did not have the 1978 revelation? What am I missing here? The way I understand it, if enough voters decided Mormons could no longer exclude gays, just as they no longer had the right to exclude blacks, they could do so.

[_Skibum04]

In places where gay marriage has been legal for over a decade there is not even a hint that something like this is being suggested. Eventually temple marriage won't be sanctioned by the state but that is a non issue.

What happens in the temple is a ritual that only Mormons with temple recomend are allowed to participate in. So the only way gays are going to be allowed to seal in the temple is if the church changes its qualifications for a temple recommend.

This hasn't happeded in any parts of the world yet and never will.

[_moksha]

The way I understand it, if enough voters decided Mormons could no longer exclude gays, just as they no longer had the right to exclude blacks, they could do so.

Even the might of the Justice Department could not quell the rights of Native Americans to use peyote in their religious ceremonies. The Courts would uphold the right of religionists not to perform gay marriages if that refusal was part of their religious doctrine.

[_ajax18]

Do you think the government would have coerced the Church to extend the priesthood to blacks had the Church not done so?

[_moksha]

Do you think the government would have coerced the Church to extend the priesthood to blacks had the Church not done so?

The only power they could exercise in the case of the Mormon Church would have been to remove their tax exempt status on the basis of being a racist organization.

In the case of not performing homosexual marriages, the LDS Church would not be in this alone and clear religious precedence for not performing such marriages by reticent Churches could be cited. This would be as big of infringement on the rights of Churches as these Churches have sought to infringe on the rights of Homosexuals.

[_ajax18]

I didn't know that whether or not you are tax exempt depends on whether the courts determine you to be a racist organization. Do they tax the Ku Klux Klan or something?

[_moksha]

Do they tax the Ku Klux Klan or something?

I'm not sure, but I hope so. A special linens tax would be apropos.

[_Polygamy-Porter]

I wish the Church could extricate itself from this issue. We need not come off the perpetual heavies when it comes to gays. We are not haters.


.

Haterade® is a favorite at all prop H8 ward parties.


Seriously though, anything marriage is not valid in the eyes of the LDS. Only "Temple Sealings" a.k.a. temple marriages are the only true and living civil unions recognized by God Jesus and Joe, so why do they even care if two of any living creature get married outside the temple?

[_Roger Morrison]

I wish the Church could extricate itself from this issue. We need not come off the perpetual heavies when it comes to gays. We are not haters.

Can we do it?

.

Of course. When a more enlightened, younger, better educated leadership emerges.

Like 2 piece garments and compacted meeting times and all worthy males holding Priesthood.

Fifty to a hundred years??? Possibly. Just a blink in real time. . .

Roger, on yer side :-)

[_bcspace]

I wish the Church could extricate itself from this issue.

I wish the Church would become more involved.

We need not come off the perpetual heavies when it comes to gays.

Yes, others need to join us in the fight.

We are not haters.

Of course not.

If we did, would it not lighten the burden of future apologists?

Faith is not increased without burdens. I can certainly see how one can tire of defending gay marriage (or Obama). There is nothing to gain by it.