Admittedly, I got busy with the holidays and fell behind in my reading at some of my favorite websites. I figured I could bookmark, spend a couple days getting reacquainted with the wife and kids, and then catch up later.
If you don't understand why it's so wrong to officially validate Rick Warren, read this. Gay kids learn that being gay is wrong, so they try to stop being attracted to the person of the same sex. And they fail. And they have horrible problems until they come to terms with their sexual identity. It's no wonder that gay teens have higher suicide rates than straight teens.
Sexual identity is part of who you are. Period. Passing hate crimes and anti-discrimination statutes and civil unions laws and the like are not bad actions, but the leader of this country announcing that he does not believe that gay people should have the right to marry their life partner, but straight people do, is pretty awful. Saying so while preaching tolerance for bigots doesn't actually change my mind on that point.
America has always had a reactionary streak which reflects other peoples' rights as irrelevant or immoral. There was a morality dressed in Christian garb built up around slavery, denying women the vote and taking land from Native Americans, to pick three obvious examples. But America also has a strong anti-racist tradition, and this tradition does draw power from the line that 'all men are created equal'. Well, um. You get the picture. Anyway, both can create political power, but you can't throw away the rights of one group without damaging the rights of other groups. Gay rights and women's rights advance in legal circles, building on each others' precedents. And I don't think it's a coincidence that America so egregiously kills Iraqis without consequence to its political leaders, and that the same groups that push said decisions (like Rick Warren) are the ones that seek to deny gay people rights.
There is no three dimensional chess here or political calculation that makes sense on this point. If the argument is that sacrificing the rights of another group on the altar of political power is a reasonable choice, then you should remember that a society that callously denies one group their humanity can just as easily deny you yours.
A) Laughable? What's "laughable" is Gary's "6,000 years" assertion re some global six-millennia-strong definition of marriage.
B) Consequences? Gary: maybe some of us are thinking about the consequences for first- and second-graders with LGBT parents, rather than simply ignoring them.
C) Frame it however you'd like, Gary, but if I allow my kids to attend the wedding of a teacher - who they adore - what business is that of yours? Your framing of what you call "a mistake" strikes me as yet another example of folks like you making it your business to infringe on the rights of parents like me.
I just finished reading this from the LDS "Newsroom" ...
Which reminded me that I'd previously written Maurine Proctor (editor of an influential Mormon mag) back in August about some of the stuff that Meridian (her mag) was putting out there in support of Prop 8 ... and that she'd replied with an article by Roger Severino, legal counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
The same Becket (of recent No Mob Veto fame) and Ballard (of Mormon Apostolic fame) who were BFF long before they recently started whining about our post-election actions.
Which led me to mutter to myself: enough with the Kabuki, Ballard.
As if Stop The Mormons hadn't long since put together the definitive timeline re your shenanigans.
Because nice people understand that nice means keeping close to home until all this recent unpleasantness blows over.
That said, Sonja, do you honestly believe that you're the only member of the LDS church who's been involved professionally with the Yes on 8 campaign? What about this guy? Or this guy?
*********************************************
The following email landed in my inbox a few hours ago.
*********************************************
Good Morning All,
I have spent some time working on these thoughts. Please take some time reading them. I hope you will feel inclined to pass them on to others not on this list. The Brethren asked us to use the internet to share our thoughts and feelings during this election cycle. This is my contribution.
Thank you in advance,
Brian L.
Elder in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Citizen of the United States of America
I am a lifelong Mormon, a native Californian, and a descendant of Mormon pioneers. Like many other Mormons, I am anguished by my Church's endorsement of Proposition 8, a ballot initiative which would eliminate civil rights to marry now accorded to gay and lesbian people in California.
I am anguished for what this campaign would do in abolishing rights and protections now belonging to fellow California citizens. But I am also anguished by the consequences of this campaign for Mormon families and wards throughout California. Since June, I have felt the profound effects of the "Yes on 8" campaign in our church meetings. In my own ward, it has dominated the content of our Sacrament Meetings and auxiliary meetings, as well as our hallway conversations. What does it mean that we are being asked to give and are giving ourselves so zealously to this campaign?
MORMONS TO DELIVER LETTERS, PETITION OPPOSING PROPOSITION 8
Not all Mormons agree with their church's decision to forcefully support Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment that would eliminate the right to same-sex marriage in California. Now they're speaking out.
Hundreds of Mormons and friends of Mormons have written letters and signed a petition at SigningForSomething.org to oppose the church's inappropriate political posturing in California. The letters and petition will be delivered to church headquarters at 2 p.m. Friday, Oct. 17, after which Mormon dissidents will be available to talk with the media about their reasons for opposing the church's political stance. Copies of the letters and petition will also be available for the press.
Signing For Something supporters will meet at a public park in downtown Salt Lake City across from the Church Office Building. It is on the northeast corner of State Street and North Temple. (This is the southernmost part of Memory Grove Park.)
The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) has just released a 42 page poll (PDF).
Frank Russo comments on what this latest PPIC poll found regarding Proposition 8:
The results here are almost a carbon copy of the Field Poll and show California voters rejecting Prop 8 which would eliminate same sex marriage rights in California by a margin of 55% to 41%. It is extremely difficult for a measure that has majority opposition in polling at this point to win.
There is a partisan divide here-and the numbers are as lopsided as they are because independents join Democrats in opposing this proposition. Democrats by a 71% to 25% margin oppose it and independents oppose it by 53% to 42%. Republicans support Prop 8 by 62% to 34%. Democratic and Republican voters have the same level of importance to the outcome here whereas it is not as important to independent voters. There is no gender gap. Evangelicals are as likely to vote in favor of Prop 8 (64%) as all others are to vote against it (63%).
And here are the findings of the latest SurveyUSA poll: Yes: 44% / No: 49%.
David Benkof, formerly the blogger at GaysDefendMarriage.com and writer of the weekly "Fabulously Observant" column for the Jerusalem Post, calls out his erstwhile Yes on 8 allies:
As a conservative Republican, I believe in free enterprise, traditional family values and people's basic liberties as guaranteed by the text of the Constitution. But sometimes my fellow conservatives and Republicans say and do things that I find so objectionable that I wonder if I'm on the wrong side. For example:
STATE BLOGS
