You seem to have an amazing ability to compartmentalize and accept the logic of justifications that, outside of a faith context, appear irrational.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) didn’t ban anyone from full membership in the Church. The right of holding the Priesthood was not available (this is different than full membership).

Those who are not Mormon would look at this argument as a distinction without a difference. You are saying, essentially, that it’s OK that the Church discriminated against African Americans for priesthood because they didn’t discriminate for “full membership”. We look at that careful exception and say, “So what, It’s still institutionalized racism and an indication of bigotry and baseless bias”.

And when you say that Jesus Christ decided in 1978 that black people were now worthy of priesthood but were unworthy before 1978, it challenges those of us who see such declarations as self-serving and, frankly, offensive to my Christian faith.

It says, in essence, that the leadership of the LDS church is without flaw but it is Jesus Christ himself who was the champion of racism until He reached a greater understanding of the arbitrary nature of judging others based on how much melanin is in their skin. It places the human leadership of the church as being more divine than God.

But this sort of thinking certainly justifies the abuse and misuse of your gay neighbors. As long as your leadership says that God commands you to behave abominably, you will do so. Because you exclude your church leadership from the possibility of error, either past or future.

And should church policy change, it isn’t because they realize that society finds their bigotry intolerable, but rather because your church will simply announce that God changed his mind.

The “decision” about allowing the keys to the Priesthood to Blacks was never a directive from Jesus Christ. It was political expediency…simple as that.

Do not water down the blatant racism and rationalize with silly arguments about full or partial membership. The Mormons practiced discrimination on their Black members.

And there was never a explanation why the Blacks were not allowed into their Temples and even now there has never been an official apology for its past racism.

We have reviewed Elder D. Oaks and his perspective on this and past occasions and anyone can plainly assess his “spirit” as anything but “loving”.

Oh, you are so right about some of the hypocritical black pastors.

As other’s have pointed out, its quite simply a lie to say that people will be sued for not allowing gay couples to be married in their churches. Similarly, allowing gay couples to marry in no way infringes on anyone’s beliefs – no one can force you to believe anything you don’t want to. You’re free to believe whatever you want to, but you don’t have a right to use those beliefs to dictate how others live their lives.

As for the issue of same-sex marriage being taught in schools, marriage is not “taught” in schools, but pictures and stories about all sorts of families are used in school curricula. Would it be reasonable to expect schools to pretend there’s only one kind of family, especially since the students themselves likely come from diverse families?

Why do your beliefs deserve precedence over others?

The notion that some churches will be forced to marry against their beliefs is a canard. Nobody forces Jewish temples or Catholics to marry couples they don’t deem fit for the rites, and that would not change one bit with same-sex marriage. Why would a gay couple want to be married where they are not welcome? It’s an absurd argument.

This is not simply an LDS view. It’s a scriptural view. Sin is Sin. We cannot change that fact no matter what logic we as humnas try to use. We can simply ignore it if it doesn’t fit our lifestyle.

Ken~
Here are a few links,I think these are pretty unbiased and might be informative. On a more personal note, we had to have people posted at the church day and night to keep people from valdalizing our church property. and Vehicles.
Job resignation: http://www.kcra.com/news/17956980/detail.html

Arson and vandalism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2132134/posts

Reguarding our founding Fathers and what they faught for, My feeling for our country runs deep, and they leaned on their deep commitment and belief in God to govern them. I am greatful everyday for the past and the sacrifice of all people for my freedoms. Our priveledge to vote was only one small aspect of it when I noted it.

Christopher~
Allowing this would infringe on the belief of others when it begins to be taught in our schools and when people are allowed to be sued for not allowing gay couples to be married in our churches. It is a reality that it will be taken further.

Anyway~ I do want to mention, I am greatful that the tone that all of the inquiries and statements have been mde in were thoughtful and friendly, It is very much appreciated. I know I didn’t answer all the inquiries specifically, But I do have to work for a living too..lol Perhaps we will chat later.

Some of the comments here stating ” I haven’t seen any discrimination” Need to only read the newspapaers.

Sandy, I believe some Mormons have been discriminated against and judged unfairly, but what I think is being missed is that does not free Mormons from responsibility when they discriminate against others. And while it may only have been a small number of Mormons who voted for Prop 8, the LDS Church did provide funding to help get the measure on the ballot in the first place.

He has a respect for all religions, and we in the LDS community value all that are good people reguardless of thier different beliefs.

That’s a noble sentiment, but actions speak louder than words. Allowing two people of the same sex to marry doesn’t infringe on the rights of Mormons or any other group–or individual, for that matter. That’s why it’s ridiculous that Elder Dallin H. Oaks would compare criticism of the LDS Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage to the discrimination faced by blacks during the 1960’s push for civil rights. Because, really, what Oaks seems to be asking for is the right to discriminate against others.

Your talk of intense love is nice and I have no reason to doubt your sincerity. But, given the choice, I’d take equality under the law and hated over discriminated against and loved.

You invite us to familiarize ourselves with Mormons so that we might judge for ourselves if Mormons are genuinely “haters”. Having been very active in the Boy Scouts, I’ve had the opportunity to know many Mormons and I have a profound appreciation for Mormon values and culture. I don’t think Mormons are full of hate. On this issue, I believe they are driven by some degree of animus. Those beliefs are not incompatible.

But you know what? Even if I genuinely despised Mormons for reasons which seem perfectly reasonable to me, I wouldn’t seek to restrict their access to the rights and freedoms enjoyed by all other Americans. Mormons apparently don’t share that sentiment. Why do you suppose that is?

I think it’s because, to you, this is an emotional issue with lots of different opinions. To me, the thing that matters the most is objective equality of access to legal protections. Nobody’s saying you can’t have your opinion about anything. America is about freedom and equality for all – not about equality for the popular.

And *that* is what our founding fathers and our brave service men shed blood for. For freedom and equality. Not, as you say, so that you can vote your conscious. America fought a civil war because freedom and equality for all were more important than popular opinion.

It was true then and it’s true today.