Thank’s to IonicDesign for pointing this out.
According to that Web site, organized protests are being set for Saturday (11/15) at 11:30 p.m. Mountain. They’ll take place throughout the country, with two in Utah: Salt Lake City and Logan.
There was a Facebook group set up for this event, but clicking on it says it’s been cancelled. Maybe there wouldn’t be a huge response for this in Logan?
Also, something interesting that IonicDesign pointed out, there’s a nice bit of Russian Constructivist imagery in their logo for this event:
-Tyler
Interesting….I wonder how many of these protesters raised their hands and supported Pres. Monson as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator? How about the 12?
I’m disappointed in my ‘used-to-be’ hero/idol Steve Young going public with a statement calling the proposition an injustice. I’m sure he raised his hand and supported the leaders of the Church too. Now he’s speaking publicly against them.
Too bad people change their mind when popular public opinion confronts them. That’s cowardly.
I have a hard time buying that they are cowards… seeing as they are embedded in a culture that has the rejection/ridicule of the pro gay marriage side set on autopilot.
1′Fer, comments like yours, and the attitude of too many to question the faith and stature of those who disagree with them are unfortunate to see. It’s part of why there is so little productive progress on issues like this. Too many (on both sides) too eager to toss around divisive rhetoric rather than have a substantial debate with those with whom they disagree.
Sorry Tyson, I completely miss your comment. Can you reword?
Jason, your liberally biased statements are very unfortunate to see. You are indeed notorious for attacking the messenger and not the message.
My point again, ’cause you missed it, is those who raise their hand in sustaining the leaders of the LDS Church as prophets, seers, and revelators have no business publicly objecting to their agendas.
Members support the Prophet as the inspired leader for the whole Church. If you disagree with him on major issues like this, then you obviously believe your wisdom is superior to God’s. I don’t believe that’s a road you ought to go down.
Good luck to you.
Again, divisive rhetoric instead of an intelligent argument, 1′Fer. There is no justification for attacking the integrity or the faith of those who disagree with you. In fact, Christ teaches against it. Often. I know many Mormons who object to Prop 8 and the church’s involvement in CA, and I know many Mormons who feel what the church did in CA is noble. Both groups are devout and faithful members of the LDS community. I despise seeing anyone argue otherwise.
I have no dog in this fight (Prop 8 is unfortunate, but it will lead to a larger win for the gay community and equal rights, in my opinion), but I find it deplorable to see a person questioning the soundness of another persons faith simply because they disagree on an issue.
It’s hypocrisy at it’s finest.
Also, I don’t think “liberal bias” is as insulting as you think it is.
I disagree.
You like to use “intelligent argument” a lot, as if your the only one relying on it. Anyone who presents an argument contrary to your opinion is immediately categorized as unintelligent. Real nice Man! Now that is hypocrisy at it’s finest.
In your defense however, this topic doesn’t need much intelligence to understand. It’s plain and simple: One cannot sustain a leader as God-inspired and authorized to direct the Church in God’s name, then in the next breathe disagree with him and the Church’s handling of Prop 8. Doing so puts their wisdom above God’s; which is of course very hypocritical. They either sustain the leaders of the Church or they don’t. You can’t hang out in the middle of the road or you get “squashed…just like grape.”
There is a reason we rely on God’s wisdom and not Man’s. When so many folks start believing their wisdom is superior, then that’s called apostasy.
I also agree with you that this action by the Church will (already has) stir more evil up against the Church. Their forces will likely gather in greater numbers for the next vote. They condemn our so-called “intolerance” with their own escalated intolerance and violence. They are indeed a class act.
That is until the church later decides to change its mind on things: Blacks in the Priesthood, interracial marriage, Polygamy, Blood Atonement, descendants of Cain. There are plenty of instances where the Church relegates poor statements by leadership to “their opinion” and not inspiration. And this is when they were acting in an official capacity (I.E. they are always the prophet/apostle after being called). So it is easy for members to say that maybe it is the leaderships opinion that the membership support prop8.
Unless, of course you still believe that the “descendants of Cain” is actual doctrine and not a prophets opinion?
The church can deny their endorsement of Gay marriage all they want, but they should stick to Joseph Smith’s advice: “teach them correct principals and let them govern themselves.” And stay out of enforcing their beliefs on others that don’t share it through government.
The rally has not been canceled, and will take place Saturday at 11:30am just north of City Hall (255 N Main). I hope many will come, gay or straight, and stand for human rights and against bigotry.
Acting on, and the protection of, “correct principles” is where the support of Prop 8 started from. And they governed themselves by voting it into law.
There is nothing wrong with democracy. It’s the extremely hypocritical response of the violent protesters that’s disturbing.
These are “correct principles” held by religions that is enforced on people that don’t share that belief.
I don’t think it is hard to see where enforcing religion through government can be wrong. Maybe we should put LDS temple attendance up for a vote, let the majority speak about allowing non-members to get recommends? If religion can be enforced through government, then it makes sense to have religion be subject to popular vote itself.
P.S. The LDS church could then validly claim the victim card with their persecution complex.
Humm. Perhaps you are confusing religion and democracy? People DO share the belief, the vote passed! People voted. Prop8 won.
Nobody is forcing anything on anyone. That’s how our democratic society works. People vote for laws and regulations.
The voice of the people made their choice. I only hope next time it comes to a vote, the same choice is made.
Also, they didn’t “govern themselves”, they governed others.
Actually, you confused the religion and democracy. You yourself stated that nobody can go against the prophets and apostles. It wasn’t a “democratic” decision from LDS members in any sense of the word… unless you want to take back what you said about people not agreeing with the church. Maybe, just maybe, the leadership decided to act on an opinion that they should finally govern others.
But, my point was that if everyone is subject to religious views through democracy, then religion should be subject to that same form of democracy and have to subject itself to the will of the people (that want to govern others).
You are trying to distort the discussion point to suit your agenda. Let’s clear it up for you.
Original topic (religion): LDS members who sustained the leadership of the church should not publicly speak out or protest against the church’s support of prop 8. Religion is not democracy. If it was, apostasy would be ramped.
Later topic (society): Democracy won. People voted and the majority supported Prop 8. The church didn’t govern anyone. The church didn’t force anyone. They taught people correct principles and people voted (governed) themselves.
Seems cut and dry to me. Please explain where ‘free agency’ was restricted by the church “governing others”, as you say.
Actually it seems the opposite is true. The response of the bigoted riots and violent protesters are trying to “govern” the church.
Democracy?
When advocating a side in an election gets you sent white powder, gets little old ladies shouted down on tv, gets you boycotted and fired, and gets you personally targeted strictly based on your religious affiliation –
then there is no Democracy.
Original topic: (religion): LDS members have always sustained prophets, and many times their “inspiration” has been relegated to be their own opinion and not doctrine. Thus, members have a perfectly reasonable place to go when voicing their disagreement… especially when they have always been encouraged to seek answers for themselves by those same leaders. If they can’t trust the answer they get on their own, why do they even bother trusting anything, including the truthfulness of the church? If they can trust the answer they came to on their own on this topic, then they can trust themselves when they receive a “testimony” of the LDS church. They don’t have to be ashamed of their own convictions even if you and many others think they should fall in line. It is pretty simple to me.
Later Topic (society): Democracy? For who? Religious people forced their view of marriage on those that don’t share that view. That is what I call a Theocracy. There is a big difference between that and a democracy. They did not govern themselves, they governed others.
Please explain how religious people governed themselves? Were they suddenly stopping themselves from marrying someone of the same gender by passing a constitutional amendment? Were all the members who voted yes keeping themselves on the “straight” and narrow and avoiding the gay inside themselves? Absolutely not. They were stopping homosexuals (not themselves) from marrying. Thus they governed others. Just because they live in the same state does not make them all the same person. That is almost a silly argument to say that prop8 supporters governed “themselves”. It is obvious that they are governing others.
“The church didn’t force anyone.”? Hmm, that depends on who you talk to.
I am amused by the intellectual acrobatics you are making though. Please continue.
Comparing this to the civil rights movement is insulting to me. Its time for a new catch-phrase for the anti prop 8 crowd.
While no one can compare the civil rights and gay marriage obstacles one for one, they have a similar theme. One minority wants a right, the majority decides they don’t want to give it to them.
Or is that not the case?
I would say that the minority is in jail too. I’m not saying that people that think they are gay should be in jail by any means. What my point is that being a minority does not automatically mean that one is in the right.
People certainly have the right to exist. One race is no less than another. This issue is far from the race issue.
There is a choice to act a way that is unnatural (unnatural being the fact that there cannot be any procreation between a couple). I suppose that this minority would want the right to adopt too?
One thing about this whole ordeal that I don’t understand is why the LDS church being focused on. They were definitely not the majority.
Well, my feeling is that if we are going to take a right away from a minority, then we had better have a very good reason to prevent them from having that right. Whether an activity is unnatural or not is beside the point.
Homosexuals already have the right to adopt I believe.
Prop 8 focused on homosexuals. The LDS church was focused on by homosexuals. Turnabout I guess. Not saying it helps their cause any, but I am not surprised. I don’t like that some individuals have undermined their own efforts with certain actions, but I don’t find the general focus on the LDS church to be completely unjust in that sense.