A letter sent to Mormon bishops and signed by church president Thomas S. Monson and his two top counselors 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 on June 29, but the letter was published Saturday on several Web sites.

Church spokesman Scott Trotter said Monday that the letter was authentic. He declined further comment, saying the letter explains the church's reasons for getting involved.

http://www.yahoo.com/s/905443

I think we should let the Mormon Church engage in politics all it wants but only if every penny it takes in is declared as taxable income.

does anyone outside utah really care what the LDS church thinks? I'm rather certain that the conservative christians in california would probably tell the mormons politely to go away.

Conservative relgious people will pull together in the face of grave threats to civilization such as marriage equality for gays even though they might not be too crazy about each other otherwise. Theology aside, they do tend to vote the same and have the same views on social issues. Hell, on social issues, Baptists are closer to Muslims than they are to some of the more liberal Christian denominations such as the UCC. And Mormonism extends far beyond Utah, although that's probably where they make up the greatest percentage of the population.

i once believed mormons were kooks, they are, of course, but no more so than any other religion

ok, maybe a little bit

Sure they're kooks, but they are very smart, serious, organized and industrious kooks which makes them more dangerous than the average run-of-the-mill collection of kooks. I think that justa did this board a great service by exposing their total random wackiness and doing it with such dignity and restraint.

And they have short sleeved dress shirts and bicycles. Which is equally dangerous.

Bicyles I have no problem with, but short sleeve dress shirts? Even i draw the line there. If God had meant for us to have short sleeved dress shirts He wouldn't have invented suits and cuff links. Not that I wear any of that stuff unless someone has died.

We all know that the Mormons are the city on the hill when it comes to family values. What with the teenage brides and polygamy bullhuckery in Texas, how can we NOT follow their shining example. /stupid

Now now, everybody knows that the polygamists are an offshoot cult that separated from the church over 100 years ago because some old pervs wanted to maintain their polygamist fantasies.

Hmmm. Where's that helpful justamere10 to explain this aspect of Mormonism to us?

The whole polygamy thing was because all the men died on the way to Salt Lake City and so men had to take more wives to etc. etc. you get the idea.

I still love the notion that their god lead them to the largest undrinkable body of water in the middle of the desert which somehow proves their god's favor of them -- so much so that they feel divinely endowed the ability to tell OTHER people how to live.

Behavior such as fornication and adultery and anything resembling it that is considered sinful and immoral IS the business of churches when it is their members who are engaged in such behavior. It is also the business of churches when temporal institutions such as government and the judiciary attempt to normalize and legitimize immoral behavior.

LDS leaders are not encouraging members to vote for politicians of one party or the other. They are encouraging members to oppose the legitimizing of behavior that is considered to be sinful. It is my understanding that the people of California already voted against homosexual "marriage" but a secular judge decided to oppose the people and force his own arrogant elitist beliefs from the bench.

But that's just my own wacky way of looking at the event, I always speak for myself only...

There are 750,000 Latter-day Saints living in California. They care! My guess is that most other Christians care when the fundamental unit of society, the family, is threatened by elitist legislation from the bench.

FLDS are not Mormons.

A secular elitist judge thumbing his nose at the people of California and forcing his beliefs on them contrary to their expressed will is not an "aspect of Mormonism".

If they are anything like Ronmey, they'll loose! AGAIN!

All legitimate Christian churches teach people the way God would have us live. One judge in California FORCED his beliefs on all the people of that state.

The Mormons did very well in Utah, God has blessed them and their industriousness greatly.

It's the people of California who lost. They were defeated by one secular elitist judge, or a few of them, I never bothered to look into the details of that sordid undemocratic event if I understand it correctly. If not, I'm sure some of the experts on this board will staighten me out pronto... It's not over yet though, I think the people get to vote again, and again, and again, though some arrogant elitist judges apparenty don't care what the people want.

hey jerkhole, i'm a baptist.

WATCH YOUR TONGUE!
Yeah, you sound like a BAPTIST.

So the judge is forcing Mormons and the Mormon church to accept and bless same sex unions? I hadn't heard that part of it.

your extreme hatred of gays is getting in the way of you being the true spiritual person we all are capable of being

until people stop hating people who are different from them, and it is hate no matter what you say, you can write all day long that you hate the sin and not the sinner and I wont believe you...until you figure out that you are the sinner in this scenario, we will never progress...

sorry, I know it is rough, but the truth is the truth...this is not a personal attack, I am actually trying to appeal to your better nature, I know you have one....

Not yet, but that would come for all churches if those secular elitist judges get their way. The CA judicial ruling has mega implications for all churches in America. It's not at all about "loving" or "hating" homosexuals as individuals, nothing whatsoever. It's an aggressive elitist attack on the lifestyle that has WORKED for Americans for centuries.


"The California court also went where no U.S. court has gone before and enshrined sexual orientation as a civil right on a par with race. Not even the European Court of Human Rights or the United Nations Human Rights Committee has so ruled.

This means that those who see marriage as the union of husband and wife, and view sexuality as best confined to marriage so defined, are in the exact position as racists under California law , according to marriage expert Maggie Gallagher. Racists are not tolerated and are certainly not given government benefits such as tax-exemptions. This makes the rights of freedom of religion on a collision course with this new-found right of sexual orientation.

"Can a group — a church or religious charity — that opposes gay marriage keep its tax exemption if gay marriage becomes the law?" Marc Stern, general counsel for the American Jewish Congress, asked. Certainly, if the California court's logic is carried beyond California, tax exemptions and government benefits for religions and their affiliates such as church schools and social service agencies benefits will be affected.

When Massachusetts adopted homosexual marriage, the state left a Boston Catholic adoption service no choice but to shut down or agree to place adopted children with homosexual couples. This is not because the state funded the charity, but only because the charity had to depend on a state license to operate. They were left with a decision, violate their conscience and place children with same-sex couples or shut their doors. After decades of service to the community, the Boston Catholic Adoption service was forced to shut their doors.

After New Jersey passed civil union legislation, the state removed part of the tax-exempt status from a church in Ocean Grove after the church refused, on religious grounds, to offer its gazebo for a civil union service. In Massachusetts, parents lost the right to be notified when their child's public school was going to teach on the topic of homosexuality.

Acts done in the name of freedom have shut down the freedom of the religious.

Harvard Law professor Mary Ann Glendon wrote in 2004, during the same-sex marriage debate in Massachusetts, ''The experience in other countries reveals that once these arrangements become law, there will be no live-and-let-live policy for those who differ. Gay-marriage proponents use the language of openness, tolerance, and diversity, yet one foreseeable effect of their success will be to usher in an era of intolerance and discrimination ... The ax will fall most heavily on religious persons and groups that don't go along ."

Protecting Marriage Preserves Religious Freedom

Anthony Picarello, president and general counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a top law firm that defends all faith groups, says, "The impact [of gay marriage] will be severe and pervasive. This is going to affect every aspect of church-state relations ... the church is surrounded on all sides by the state. The boundaries are usually peaceful, so it's easy sometimes to forget they are there. But because marriage affects just about every area of the law, gay marriage is going to create a point of conflict at every point around the perimeter."

In December 2005, Picarello hosted a conference of noted First Amendment scholars from across the political spectrum to assess the religious freedom implications of legalized same-sex marriage. Some of the scholars supported gay marriage and some opposed it. Picarello says, "All the scholars we got together see a problem; they all see a conflict coming. They differ on how it should be resolved and who should win, but they all see a conflict coming."

Areas of Conflict

Tax-Exemptions and Government Benefits : Religious groups could find themselves suffering along with the Boy Scouts, as access to public facilities is stripped away. Gay-rights lawyers will likely challenge groups' federal tax-exempt status, charging that such an exemption "subsidizes discrimination."

Maggie Gallagher, president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy says, "Religious groups that take government funding will almost certainly be required to play by the nondiscrimination rules, but what about groups that, while receiving no government grants, are tax-exempt?

"Can a group — a church or religious charity — that opposes gay marriage keep its tax exemption if gay marriage becomes the law?" Marc Stern, general counsel for the American Jewish Congress, says "That is the 18 trillion dollar question."

Professional Licenses : Professional licenses might also be denied to psychological clinics, social workers, marriage and family counselors, and others who believe same-sex relationships are "objectively disordered." Would family service providers affiliated with a religion that opposes same-sex marriage have to give marriage counseling to same-sex couples to help them preserve their marriage?

Religious Employers : Suppose a Catholic summer camp refuses to hire or retain employees in same-sex marriages, they could be sued on the basis of "marital status discrimination."

Religious Colleges : Colleges that refuse admission to same-sex couples could face civil lawsuits and loss of accreditation. Marc Stern says that "same-sex marriage will affect religious educational institutions, in at least four ways: admissions, employment, housing, and regulation of clubs."

Public Accommodation Laws : Many legal scholars agree that public accommodation laws can require all commercial enterprises to serve all customers. However, if same sex marriage is legal

Marc Stern asks, "What about religious camps...? Will they be considered by courts to be places of public accommodation, too? Could a religious summer camp operated in strict conformity with religious principles refuse to accept children coming from same-sex marriages? What of a church-affiliated community center, with a gym and a Little League, that offers family programs?"



http://www.ldsmag.com/familyleadernetwork/...27marriage.html

I do not hate people who choose to do sex with people of the same gender, but I do think their sexual behavior is immoral and sinful.

Homosexuals are not different than me, but their sexual behavior is. Some heterosexuals choose to do sex in ways other than the traditional missionary position. That does not make those people different than couples who restrict their sexual activity to the traditional way.

Some people choose to eat carrots, some don't. That doesn't make the people different, just some of their behavior.

Let me translate for those who dont do religilous speak:

I dont understand gays, I fear them, they disgust me and I know they cant go to heaven with me because God only loves people who are like me...

Replace the word "gays" with "people" and you might understand how illogical your 'translation' is and how far it is from what I was trying to communicate in plain English. Some people seem to fail to understand that for the 95% of Americans whose sexual behavior is normal, homosexuals are NOT different, they just choose to take sexual pleasure with people of the same gender, that's all.

But I do believe that God loves all of His children and that all people who keep His commandments go to heaven.

IMO the Mormon church has already forfeited its right to tax exempt status with its blatant political involvement.

That something has "worked" for centuries is a pretty meaningless statement. Horse powered transportation worked for centuries. So did slavery. That is no argument for the continued existence of either one. But that aside, what you write is really little more than whining about the potential for inconvenience or at worst the loss of some of your special privileges.I still don't see anywhere that any Mormon in position to do so would be forced to bless or sanctify a marriage between two people of the same sex.

That being said, I don't know why any gay couple would seek to suffer the ignominy of being married in a Mormon church or any church that didn't want them. View it as a mark of the success of your brainwashing that gay Mormons exist at all.

Further about the LDS and other churchs' opposition to the California decree by elitist secular judges who don't care what the people want:

Read the following and you will better understand why churches are going to FIGHT what happened in California and why it has nothing whatsoever to do with loving or hating individuals because of the way they choose to get and give sexual pleasure.


The LDS position is: “Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the creator's plan for his children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage.”

In California, a marriage protection amendment will be on the ballot in November, following a petition drive where 1.1 million signatures were gathered to make that possible. California has had a marriage protection statute, Prop 22, defining marriage as being between a man and a woman, which was passed by 61% of the voters in 2000. However, four judges overturned the will of 4.5 million California voters recently, when the California Supreme Court overturned Prop 22 and legalized same-sex marriage.

What is disturbing is that unlike Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage is confined only to those who are residents of the state, California has no such law. Thus residents of other states, whose marriage laws do not allow genderless marriage can come to California, get their nuptials, and then head home claiming their marriage is legal.

This not only opens the door for legal chaos, but for courts, along with rogue state officials to systematically dismantle state statutes and amendments designed to protect the traditional definition of marriage.

Most recently, New York Governor Paterson ordered state agencies to recognize out-of-state homosexual “marriages” even though New York's Court of Appeals ruled in 2006 that only the union of a man and woman is a legal marriage in the state.

Thus, with this Supreme Court decision, if a marriage amendment does not pass in California this fall, California will be exporting same-sex marriage possibly to every state in the nation.

There are many, even among Latter-day Saints, who do not fully understand the broad implications for our nation and for future generations in letting marriage be redefined. Opponents mask their efforts saying things like, “How would your marriage be affected if your same-sex neighbors were allowed to marry?” This is simplistic and overlooks what a radical experiment this is that will affect thousands of laws and certainly blast religious freedom.

Intentionally Creating Motherless or Fatherless Children

On the most fundamental level, same sex marriage is about adult gratification and tramples the needs of children. Ask a child, “Which is unnecessary, a mother or a father?”

Of course, life isn't perfect and sometimes people become single parents — a spouse dies or parents experience a painful divorce. Although we can't always protect bad things from happening, there is one thing we can do. Never intentionally create motherless or fatherless children.

In 1996, the U.S. Congress made the following findings, "Marriage is the foundation of a successful society," and "marriage is an essential institution of a successful society which promotes the interests of children." Decades of government and social science data prove these statements are true. Yet, never in the history of the world has the institution of marriage been under such aggressive assault legally, legislatively and culturally.

Study after study shows that children fare best in a home with their own mother and father. They have less delinquency, less drug usage, less tendency for suicide, less abuse, less tendency to live in poverty. They have higher grades, more security, more self-confidence. Can we really afford to create conditions where more children may become broken?

If a society where purposely trying to destroy itself, it could nothing more grievous than subvert its basic foundation.

Consider this: If same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, an entirely new social norm is created. Children will learn in school that sex between members of the same sex or between members of opposite sexes is an equal choice, and those with fragile identities may experiment. We will not even have a word for the union of a man and a woman — for the term marriage will have been co-opted to merely mean the union of any two people. And if two people, why not three or more?

If marriage comes to mean everything that anyone defines it to be, it will mean nothing.

Some may argue that marriage is a private matter and redefining it causes no harm to others or society as a whole. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Any law that dilutes the definition and purpose of marriage leads to fewer marriages and more children being born out of wedlock. Sadly, we have already witnessed these alarming trends in Scandinavian countries that legalized same-sex marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships more than 10 years ago, and now the out of wedlock birthrate is between 50 to 60 percent (depending on the country).

Family fragmentation is a public issue with public consequences. For example, in April of 2008 the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, along with others, issued a study showing that family fragmentation in the United States is costing taxpayers $112 billion annually.




http://www.ldsmag.com/familyleadernetwork/...27marriage.html

so do gays keep the commandments?

(for the sake of discussion, I will pretend that such things matter)

You are certainly entitled to your (minority group) opinion. My intention here is to present the other side and to perhaps help you and others to better understand why there is so much opposition to the behavior of those in positions of authority who ignore the will of the people and are trying to subvert and destroy the values that made this nation so great for centuries.

Those "gay" Mormons are treated the same way as are any other members of the LDS Church who commit serious sexual sins. Anyone who chooses to consistently commit serious sins is probably better off not affiliating with an institution that has anything to do with abiding by God's commandments to His children on earth.

That's the same as asking "do people keep the commandments?"

Most Christian churches (including the LDS Church) teach that ALL sexual relations outside of the bonds of matrimony are immoral and sinful. So yes, homosexual sexual BEHAVIOR breaks God's commandments.

It is my personal belief that if secular legislators and judges force homosexual "marriage" on the nation those secular marriages are not recognized by God and thus people who engage in sexual behavior with people of the same gender will continue to break God's commandments even if they think they are "married". Those arrogant California judges seem to think they can replace God with their dictates and elitist legislating from the bench...

According to the polls from somewhere from 40% to over 50% of Californians don't have a problem with marriage equality or with the way the CA constitution was interpreted by those nasty elitist judges.

And regarding your figures on out of wedlock births in nasty elitist countries like Sweden, you might find the following interesting...

http://www.psychpage.com/gay/gmkurtz.html

you are who we think you are, at least you are honest when you say you think God loves you and will take you to heaven with him but doesnt love a gay person because of who he chooses to love

ridiculous and absurd, but at least you are honest - i feel like someone opened the door and the 16th century walked in, the sad part is that you cant see that your entire position is the most un Christ like position you could take, but I dont expect you to see that

Perhaps you are referring to a poll since the judges made their ruling. The last time Californians got to vote on this serous issue apparently about 63% voted against same sex "marriage". They'll be voting again but it looks like only a federal constitutional amendment is going to put maverick judges in their place on this matter.

All Americans should be concerned about those nasty elitist judges because their dictates are recognized as law and thus backed up by guns at the heads of the people who disagree with their opinions. What they did in California in my opinion leads to a complete subversion of the constitutional rights of the majority of Americans.

WARNING:

WARNING:

WARNING:
One who would believe the above, is NOT believing in the TRUE GOD who is LOVE.

I did not say that God doesn't love people who choose to take sexual pleasure with people of the same gender, I said that it is my belief that God loves ALL of His children.

People who choose to break God's commandments as taught by Jesus Christ are the ones who are "unChristlike".

"If you love me, keep my commandments" He taught.

gay people scare the holy shit out of you and I/we just dont understand why....

clearly their getting married will have no ill effects, whatsoever, on straight marriages, so that cant be it...

personally, I remember what it felt like when I was a homophobic person filled with disgust for gays, but I was younger and far less mature than I am now...some people will never get it and some will.

One of your 10 commands are: Don't commit adultery.

By prohibiting glbt to marry, the church FORCES us to "live in sin."
By allowing glbt to marry, according to your church law, we are accepted by god as a married couple and thus not living in "sin".

I didn't know that being free to inflict your particular religious beliefs on society as a whole in the form of laws which all must obey was a constitutional right. You have every right to ignore this marriage law. Gay Mormons are free not to marry and the Mormon church is free to continue to disapprove and to refuse to sanction. Those of us who are not Mormon are free to deal with the law on our own terms. Not the ideal theocratic approach maybe, but the American one.

And i hope it does come to a vote. Might be close, but i think we'll win. And even if we don't, constitutions can be unamended. It's going our way. Not as fast as I'd like and progress is not uniform throughout the country, but it's going our way.

ya think!

good for you Lila...even with all the exaggeration that was made up and put in the four Gospels, at no point does Jesus say you should love this person but hate this person...and yet, the very people who claim to follow him do just that.

If the Temple is sealed, how do we know what the LDS leaders are telling their members?
California passed a law which went against its constitution. Your "wacky way of looking at the event" in this case, is wrong. By the way, all judges should be "secular." I'm not buying any of your dirty theocracy.

YES, IT IS...as we both know, either one day we will all live in harmony and peace, or we will self destruct, one or the other...

there was a day when the less mature thought a black person wasnt a full person, or an Asian person...

today it is the gay person who isnt a full person, but that too will change...

Not my commandments, GOD'S commandments!

Nobody forces you to engage in sexual behavior except if you are being raped, in which case you cannot be held accountable by a just God.

You are the one using words like "scare", "fear", etc. not me. People who choose to ignore God's commandments and to engage in sexual relations outside of marriage do not frighten me anymore than does any other person. They are the ones who in the view of god-fearing people will reap eternal consequences for their choices.

this my friends is why it is so darn important we get the white house...so far, in this country, religious hatred of gays and others isnt allowed as a government act as our constitution doesnt allow it, but another 4 yrs of republicans and our Supreme Court could look like something out of the dark ages, being gay or black or whatever would be dangerous, at that point...

Let's be clear here, they're YOUR god's commandments. The dictates of the god that you choose to believe in. They are not applicable to anyone who does not believe in your god or who doesn't interpret the words of the deity in the same way that you do.

For it to be any other way would be coming dangerously close to theocracy. something that you might not have a problem with as long as it is your brand of theocracy, but with which i do.

Some members of some deviant minority groups apparently like to pretend that people who believe that their abnormal behavior is immoral and sinful hate them. They then try to make a case that they are being persecuted and therefore should have special minority group protections in law.

Yes, I think it is important for deviant minority groups to elect a USA president who will support the appointment of justices and judges who will cater to the minority and ignore the will of the people. Otherwise, Americans may have to live within the constitution as it exists today.

But it is my opinion that homosexuals are only being used by secular progressives because their behavior is contrary to Christian beliefs and values. If the constitution is overthrown and intolerance for churches and Christian values becomes the norm, I think homosexuals too would be turned on by the secular elitists as rule from the bench takes over America as we knew it and our nation sinks to the level of other secular nations.

I love this. Being labeled a deviant by you is an honor which I will gladly accept

And I appreciate your concern that homosexuals, aka deviants, are simply being used as tools in the hands of secular progressives. I would hate to think that I'm being exploited by those damned secular progressives. The fact that I am one myself would seem to minimize the chances of that, but I guess you can't be too careful.

The Constitution is not being overthrown, if it is I'd like some evidence please. And as for the Constitution of California, the nasty elitist judge was simply upholding it as currently written, ergo the need in the eyes of theocrats for the amendment to change it.

And as for our nation sinking to the level of other secular nations, our nation was founded as a secular nation in the face of countries with state churches and official support of religion, and church interference in the government. Those secular nations you refer to have simply risen to meet our original ideals while we are sinking to become what they once were.