Comments on: LDS Elder: “Central Doctrine of Eternal Marriage” At Heart of Political Activities http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Fri, 24 May 2013 18:17:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: The Mormon Closet « Project Honesty http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-75095 The Mormon Closet « Project Honesty Mon, 09 Aug 2010 08:21:01 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-75095 [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...] [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...]

]]> By: The Religious/Political Crusade of the Mormons « Project Honesty http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-75094 The Religious/Political Crusade of the Mormons « Project Honesty Mon, 09 Aug 2010 07:37:05 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-75094 [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...] [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...]

]]> By: The Religious/Political Crusade of the Mormon Church « Project Honesty http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-75093 The Religious/Political Crusade of the Mormon Church « Project Honesty Mon, 09 Aug 2010 07:35:46 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-75093 [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...] [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...]

]]> By: The Mormon Church and Its Religious Crusade « Project Honesty http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-75092 The Mormon Church and Its Religious Crusade « Project Honesty Mon, 09 Aug 2010 07:31:35 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-75092 [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...] [...] Encouraging Church members to think of the satellite broadcast as though they were “sitting in [a] living room having a confidential talk,” the speakers were high-ranking Mormon Church officials, members of the Quorum of the Twelve and the Quorum of the Seventy. As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the Church accepted Elder M. Russell Ballard as a “prophet, seer, and revelator”. This gave his words special meaning among Church members. Ballard was clear about the Church’s motives in the one-hour broadcast to the faithful: We are again participating with a coalition of churches, organizations, and individuals sponsoring the November ballot issue known as Proposition 8. The amendment would change the California constitution to ensure that only marriage between a man and a woman would be legally recognized. We know that it is not without controversy. Yet let me be clear that at the heart of this issue is the essential doctrine of eternal marriage and the role it plays in our Father in Heaven’s plan. [...]

]]> By: Sheri http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-23637 Sheri Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:15:56 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-23637 Just a quick question: if ethnic genocide were a religion, would that make it OK? You know, religious freedom of speech and such. Mmm, just a minute ... it was a religion in 3rd Reich Germany and other places like Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Just a quick question: if ethnic genocide were a religion, would that make it OK? You know, religious freedom of speech and such. Mmm, just a minute … it was a religion in 3rd Reich Germany and other places like Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

]]> By: Walter Ellsworth http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-22079 Walter Ellsworth Fri, 07 Nov 2008 04:06:17 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-22079 The gays in reaching for the skies ended up in the basement to much to soon. I'm glad they made this mistake it looks like this is going to end up before the United States Supreme court there they will finally lose. Let the Mormans have there belief in what they want if you don't like it chose some other religon don't confuse imorality with civil rights.If gays relationship is normal then they would be able to bring children into the world by it. The gays in reaching for the skies ended up in the basement to much to soon. I’m glad they made this mistake
it looks like this is going to end up
before the United States Supreme court
there they will finally lose. Let the Mormans have there belief in what they
want if you don’t like it chose some other religon don’t confuse imorality
with civil rights.If gays relationship
is normal then they would be able to
bring children into the world by it.

]]> By: Ben in Oakland http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-20109 Ben in Oakland Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:11:34 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-20109 No one’s religious beliefs are even threatened anymore and perhaps some of those “conjoined” couples can go bowling with some of their married couple friends someday, and maybe they would find out that it wasn’t the fact that someone was gay that bothered them but the fact that someone tried to change something they believed was sacred just the way they had it. You can respond and refute my post all you want." Actually, mediation, it doesn't work that way. No one's religious beliefs are threatened by my marriage at all. Any more than someone's religious beliefs are threatened by someone believing something totally different.They can still believe whatever they want to believe. I'm a jew. I don't buy any of the christian story at all. does that threaten their beliefs? what they really want is reality to conform to their rleigious beliefs. guess what? It isn't going ot happen. you are also assuming that this is actually aobut marriage. It is not. It is about what it has always been about-- how much the very existence of gay people bothers some straight people, and some gay-people-who-wanna-be-straight-but-aint. Here is the compromise. i won't get married in your church. you stay the hell out of my civil marirage. we're obth happy. No one’s religious beliefs are even threatened anymore and perhaps some of those “conjoined” couples can go bowling with some of their married couple friends someday, and maybe they would find out that it wasn’t the fact that someone was gay that bothered them but the fact that someone tried to change something they believed was sacred just the way they had it. You can respond and refute my post all you want.”

Actually, mediation, it doesn’t work that way. No one’s religious beliefs are threatened by my marriage at all. Any more than someone’s religious beliefs are threatened by someone believing something totally different.They can still believe whatever they want to believe.

I’m a jew. I don’t buy any of the christian story at all. does that threaten their beliefs?

what they really want is reality to conform to their rleigious beliefs. guess what? It isn’t going ot happen.

you are also assuming that this is actually aobut marriage. It is not. It is about what it has always been about– how much the very existence of gay people bothers some straight people, and some gay-people-who-wanna-be-straight-but-aint.

Here is the compromise. i won’t get married in your church. you stay the hell out of my civil marirage. we’re obth happy.

]]> By: cowboy http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-20072 cowboy Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:19:24 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-20072 No...Mediation, I'm not flexible. The word marriage is not owned by the Mormons. In fact, some Mormons think "marriage" is inferior to the word: "sealed". That's their term for being married in their Temples. They use the term to designate from (and denigrate) the more worldly connotation of being married in the County Courthouse or City Hall. Get over the ownership of the word marriage. You're in denial if you think a separate (but equal) term is going to work in our system. Things will <b>NOT</b> stay the same. Then, are you saying this Proposition is frivolous? Not so. It discriminates. Which means it thrusts the California government into a course directly at the U.S. Supreme Court and then a Federal Marriage Amendment. And all for what? The crux of it all is that the Mormons are anti-gay. That's their only rationale for this Proposition. The word marriage is not harmed if two men decide they want to make the same promises to their life partner as would a Mormon and his wife. No…Mediation, I’m not flexible. The word marriage is not owned by the Mormons. In fact, some Mormons think “marriage” is inferior to the word: “sealed”. That’s their term for being married in their Temples. They use the term to designate from (and denigrate) the more worldly connotation of being married in the County Courthouse or City Hall.

Get over the ownership of the word marriage. You’re in denial if you think a separate (but equal) term is going to work in our system.

Things will NOT stay the same. Then, are you saying this Proposition is frivolous? Not so. It discriminates. Which means it thrusts the California government into a course directly at the U.S. Supreme Court and then a Federal Marriage Amendment.

And all for what?

The crux of it all is that the Mormons are anti-gay. That’s their only rationale for this Proposition. The word marriage is not harmed if two men decide they want to make the same promises to their life partner as would a Mormon and his wife.

]]> By: Mediation http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-20050 Mediation Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:09:44 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-20050 I am pretty sure neither side in this argument is even trying to see this issue from the other's point of view. If either side would just do that there would be understanding and perhaps even a win-win compromise could be met. The Mormons, and Christians in general for that matter, have no intention of telling anyone who they can and cannot love. And the gay community has the right to live and receive the same benefits and rights that straight people in partnerships have. Is it a fundamental belief of Mormons that marriage is between a man and a woman? Yes! So what happens when a man and a man are married? it messes with their beliefs. How do homosexuals feel when they can't exchange vows and be "Married"? Sad. Solution: we keep the word marriage to mean between a man and a woman. and we make up a new name and issue licenses just like the first one. We will call this legal and lawful partnership that is equal to the first in any government or bill of rights sense...I don't know... "conjoinment!" (I don't know I just made that up I think). Issuers of marriage licenses will not be required to issue "Conjoinment" licenses and vise versa. No government agency will be allowed to deny someone rights or privileges because they are conjoined rather than married. No religion will be required to conjoin anyone if it goes against their beliefs. Oddly enough conjoined partners can exchange rings and vows and do everything that happens at a wedding. (notice that no one cares if there is a wedding or not) the only difference is that on their window on the way to the honeymoon the groomsmen and bridesmaids will have written "Just Conjoined" instead of "Just Married." Homosexuals can still get married, they just need to find someone of the opposite sex willing to take that step with them. And any straight person who wishes to conjoin themselves is free to do so if they find someone of the same sex to conjoin to. And turns out we ALL have more freedom after we reach a compromise WIN-WIN-WIN! Now all arguments are settled and do you know what? No one's religious beliefs are even threatened anymore and perhaps some of those "conjoined" couples can go bowling with some of their married couple friends someday, and maybe they would find out that it wasn't the fact that someone was gay that bothered them but the fact that someone tried to change something they believed was sacred just the way they had it. You can respond and refute my post all you want. The fact is that if neither side is able to budge then there is going to have to be compromise. If Proposition 8 does not pass then a new president is set forever. One side loses and one side wins. If it passes things stay exactly the way they are and there is room for compromise and talks about a real solution that does not change others fundamental beliefs. We don't even have to call it "conjoinment." I am open to any other ideas... something completely new perhaps? I am flexible. Are you? I am pretty sure neither side in this argument is even trying to see this issue from the other’s point of view. If either side would just do that there would be understanding and perhaps even a win-win compromise could be met. The Mormons, and Christians in general for that matter, have no intention of telling anyone who they can and cannot love. And the gay community has the right to live and receive the same benefits and rights that straight people in partnerships have. Is it a fundamental belief of Mormons that marriage is between a man and a woman? Yes! So what happens when a man and a man are married? it messes with their beliefs. How do homosexuals feel when they can’t exchange vows and be “Married”? Sad.
Solution: we keep the word marriage to mean between a man and a woman. and we make up a new name and issue licenses just like the first one. We will call this legal and lawful partnership that is equal to the first in any government or bill of rights sense…I don’t know… “conjoinment!” (I don’t know I just made that up I think). Issuers of marriage licenses will not be required to issue “Conjoinment” licenses and vise versa. No government agency will be allowed to deny someone rights or privileges because they are conjoined rather than married. No religion will be required to conjoin anyone if it goes against their beliefs. Oddly enough conjoined partners can exchange rings and vows and do everything that happens at a wedding. (notice that no one cares if there is a wedding or not) the only difference is that on their window on the way to the honeymoon the groomsmen and bridesmaids will have written “Just Conjoined” instead of “Just Married.” Homosexuals can still get married, they just need to find someone of the opposite sex willing to take that step with them. And any straight person who wishes to conjoin themselves is free to do so if they find someone of the same sex to conjoin to. And turns out we ALL have more freedom after we reach a compromise WIN-WIN-WIN!
Now all arguments are settled and do you know what? No one’s religious beliefs are even threatened anymore and perhaps some of those “conjoined” couples can go bowling with some of their married couple friends someday, and maybe they would find out that it wasn’t the fact that someone was gay that bothered them but the fact that someone tried to change something they believed was sacred just the way they had it. You can respond and refute my post all you want. The fact is that if neither side is able to budge then there is going to have to be compromise. If Proposition 8 does not pass then a new president is set forever. One side loses and one side wins. If it passes things stay exactly the way they are and there is room for compromise and talks about a real solution that does not change others fundamental beliefs. We don’t even have to call it “conjoinment.” I am open to any other ideas… something completely new perhaps? I am flexible. Are you?

]]> By: cowboy http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4104/comment-page-1#comment-19876 cowboy Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:10:46 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=4104#comment-19876 You hit the nail on the head Mr. Blanco. It wasn't THEM [The Prophet and 12 Apostles] who did the nasty political tactics. It was over-eager Saints who literally interpreted the letter to do <b>all they could</b> to enact this piece of legislation. Pitiful. You hit the nail on the head Mr. Blanco. It wasn’t THEM [The Prophet and 12 Apostles] who did the nasty political tactics. It was over-eager Saints who literally interpreted the letter to do all they could to enact this piece of legislation.

Pitiful.

]]>