Those words rarely precede anything good in my experience. Such was the case last Sunday. Typically, edicts come down from the LDS first presidency (the head honchos in SLC). So whatever came next was going to be Minnesota related. That could only mean one thing. dun dun DUUUUN… WE CAN’T LET THE GAYS DESTROY THE FAMILY!
I could feel my blood pressure rising as I braced myself for whatever rhetoric was about to be unleashed. The gist of the letter was an explanation of the ballot initiative next November – if it passes, the state constitution would amend article XIII to read, “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota.” The letter did not come out and say which way to vote but the underlying message was clear. We were advised to remember the family is a fundamental unit of society and to read the Proclamation on the Family and prayerfully consider how to get involved. It concluded with a reminder that church buildings and directories are not to be used for political purposes – with this caveat – unless otherwise directed.
This initiative did not get on the ballot with a petition drive. It was put on by our state legislature. One of the drivers behind it was former GOP Senate Majority leader Amy Koch who stepped down from said post after it came to light that the married senator was having an “inappropriate relationship” with a male staffer. Our legislators who were so keen to pre-emptively attack other families would do well to focus on their own.
I’ve been through this before. I lived in Nebraska when a petition drive was held there to get DOMA on the ballot. At church we were not even asked if we wanted to gather signatures. We were handed packets (which I did not take) and several hours of our usual meetings were taken up with our bishop and stake president rallying the troops, so to speak – even sending people out on a Sunday gather signatures at the College World Series. I didn’t speak out against it. I just murmured with my like-minded friends about our disgust over the church getting involved. Hell, damn near running the whole thing. And happy, oh so happy, to join forces with evangelicals who agree with Mormons on nothing other than the so-called moral decline of society.
When Prop 8 was going on in CA, I told a friend on Facebook that it hurt me to see status updates about how she was going out and gathering signatures. I asked what was her reasoning? She recited the talking points she’d been given at church – churches would be forced to marry gays, it was about religious freedom, blah blah blah. I pointed out that the Catholic church refused to marry my divorced mother. I pointed out that the LDS church already restricts who can get married in the temple. I asked her about the religious freedom of my lgbt friends who attend churches that would happily marry them. Where was their religious freedom? I pointed out that atheists get married all the time. Marriage isn’t reserved for the religious. It’s a legal arrangement. She conceded she hadn’t thought about these things. Whether Prop 8 passed or not, there would still be gay and lesbian families. If it was really about preserving families, why send a message to the children of these families that their parents are “less than”? I’m sure she went on to vote for it but I hope I planted a seed for her to think about the morality of attacking someone else’s family.
I knew this issue would eventually come to Minnesota. My hope was that it would be the other way around, not something to fight against but to fight for. Before I rejoined the church I met with the bishop and the stake president. I said I knew this issue would eventually come up in MN and when it did, I wouldn’t be picketing outside the temple but I would be actively involved in supporting the rights of my gay and lesbian friends. It concerns me that it is being brought up in January when the vote is in November. If the church is about to launch an anti-family campaign (and that’s exactly what it is) then I’ll happily take myself up to the progressive and inclusive Hennepin Ave UMC on Sundays. My relationship with the LDS church is a complicated and nuanced one. But one thing I’ll never do is support something based on “God said so.”
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. ~Buddha
The LDS church has an army of volunteers at its beck and call. Imagine the good it could do if rallied for health care for all or lowering education costs or clean air initiatives. We truly set the bar low when such power is used merely to oppress others. That’s seriously lazy and decidedly un-Christian behavior.
Links of note:
Minnesotans United for all Families
Mormons for Marriage
Great post!
Good luck to you and to everyone in Minnesota as you deal with the political process in church. May you find ways to protect the most vulnerable.
I love this post. Thank you for supporting families like mine. I do not and cannot understand why the church feels the need to punish my *innocent children* by depriving them of their civil rights simply because they happen to have two mothers. Talk about visiting the so-called “sins of the fathers” upon their children.
THANK-YOU !!!!!
I have not been in church in MANY years. The last time I attended was when my brother blessed his child about 7 years ago. My spouse and I sat in the VERY back row with our (then fosterchild) between us. Obviously our presence in the congretation was well known. A lady stood to give a talk and stated she felt impressed on by the spirit to change the topic of her talk and to talk instead about families and the need to preserve families. She spoke out against homosexuality and the damage it does and how her heart BREAKS to see children brought up in homosexual homes because of the psychological damagei t causes. When we left the meeting and drove home, my mother proceeded to bear her testimony to us of how the speaker was led by the spirit to talk about us in the meeting. I was so angry – which then led my mom to talk about how the spirit of Satan and of anger was in me because of my reaction!!! In many ways I feel it is a losing battle to fight for rights within the church.
Julie – don’t try to find rationality within ANY faith that follows orders from the top and then immediately jumps on anyone who dares to question. The woman who changed her topic did not feel prompted by the Spirit – she felt a burning of hatred against you. I know this game – I lived in Utah County for 8 years. The key is to find one here and one there who will give you the silent nod – men and women (and sometimes teens!) who have thought all this through. The key for me has been to live as Christ would have me. Not as the Pharisees would have me.
I have to agree with Martin. It’s not really the spirit of our Savior if it leads to exclusion, intolerance, marginalization and hatred. Those qualities belong entirely to someone else.
The spirit of Satin runs rampant in the church they are beguiled in thinking it is God.
Thank you for standing firm. Post the last four lines somewhere really big. Next time this occurs in any ward in which I sit, I shall stand up and yell out, “Enough with Latter Day Racism” and then sit down – so that every single person in the congregation knows that some of us will no longer continue to play their game. If contention brings about the Spirit of the Devil, then what does speaking one’s conscience bring? Ask Martin Luther. Better yet, as we remember him on this day, ask Dr. Martin Luther King.
Key Lime- I agree with your sentiments. Often, when a letter is read from any authority of the church over the pulpit, my heart leaps into my throat. And your final point is one of your most poignant: We do have such capacity for good. We are organized, we are driven, and most of us want to engage in Christlike causes. Yet, when we focus our attention on whether or not people are wearing skinny jeans, triple-pierced ears, and who may or may not be wearing their temple garments and why–we have lost focus. In front of our very faces, people cry out for food, health care, shelter, and equality. And yet, not only do we ignore them–often we are among the worst when it comes to further oppressing them. If that hurts me as an imperfect, fallible human, imagine how it makes our Savior feel.
Mitch, it’s a privilege to hear from you. I first heard about you through Google news. It must be challenging at times being thrust into this spotlight. No doubt it has its rewards as well.
Good Call.
Fantastic post.
LDS inc is welcome to preach any message they so choose. They’re welcome to spend millions of dollars on their “…and I’m a Mormon” PR campaign. Their hypocrisy, ignorance, and bigotry will be shoved right back into their faces on every political front.
My great-great grandfather (Charles W. Penrose) was a polygamist (3 wives) and counselor to Brigham Young, and yet my long-term relationship couldn’t be invalidated and outlawed fast enough for LDS Inc.
Self-respecting gay men need to run, not walk, from that hateful organization.
These proclamations from church leaders make me sad, too. I take solace in recognizing the increasing number of members that disagree with the church’s stand. During prop 8 I knew a lot of Mormons who disagreed with the church’s involvement and I have only seen the number grow since then. Some of those that disagree are bishops and high councilmen and stake presidents, which is exactly what we need.
And I disagree with the earlier poster. The best thing that could happen is not for gay men to flee the church. The church needs as many examples as possible of committed, Christlike, faithful gay men. We need more gay men who fill callings and attend the temple and faithfully, openly, lovingly stand as examples of truth and righteousness.
That’s a hard thing for a gay man to do and I don’t expect anyone to do it forever, but say you set aside 2 years and consider it like serving a mission. Just think of the hearts you could touch and the good you could do.
I gave the Church my early life, a faithful mission, aversion therapy at BYU–I lasted until I graduated from BYU. That was plenty. All gay men should flee the Mormon Church asap. It will save your life.
If I may ask, what kind of aversion therapy did you experience?
@Don, you are right, the Mormon church is not a healthy place if you are affected by pressure and negativity because a lot of LDS members are still struggling to make it out of the dark ages of judgmentalism.
But there are increasing numbers of Mormons realizing that their past views were wrong. And the best thing to increase that trend is for Mormons to see up-close examples of great gay men that make them feel the spirit.
For someone that hears others condemn him and feels self-loathing and guilt, it’s a toxic place to be. But for someone who has made it through the darkness into the light of loving himself for who he is regardless of anyone else’s opinions or beliefs, it’s a task that could do an incredible amount of good to change people’s hearts. And that is what the Mormon church needs most desperately to prevent more young people from living in the same toxic environment.
If you’re not safe there, then getting out is absolutely the right answer. But anyone who can be there and sincerely love the people there, will do an immense amount of good.
Right on, Don!
I was a Bishop in the LDS church when it launched Proposition 22 in California and they asked me to read a letter like that over the pulpit. It made me ill, and I felt felt dirty about the secretive way we were going about it. But I reasoned that I shouldn’t stir up our congregation or embarrass my family by publicly opposing the church.
So I kept quiet and faithfully went about my duties, even when wonderful Stuart Matis shot himself on the steps of our chapel in protest of it.
I would like to believe that in the days the church opposed interracial marriage, I would have come down on the right side of history. One of my biggest regrets is that I didn’t take a stand against propositions 22 and 8 when I could and should have.
Chris – you were my bishop back in those days (although as I recall we were out of your ward, but still in your stake, when Prop 22 was going on).
If it makes a difference to you, I’ve heard dozens of stories from members of that stake (and the neighboring ones) of people in situations similar to yours – some leaders, some not. It’s a different environment in many respects now.
As hard as it is to have discussions about same-sex marriage and the way we treat LGBT people (both members and non-) and their families, those discussions are important – and many wouldn’t have happened except for the atrocities like Stuart’s suicide or over-the-pulpit politicking.
The stories of people who’ve changed their minds because of the church’s political involvement are important stories to share. They give hope to so many and remind us that nobody is truly alone – others bear our same burdens – and what a blessing it is to know we aren’t alone.
The internet is much more of a presence in the lives of members now than it was 12 years ago during Prop 22, and the thoughtful discussions which have arisen both online and in person since Prop 8 have made so many people aware of a problem they never knew existed.
It shouldn’t take a political campaign to move us to act out in love, but sometimes that’s exactly what we need. And no matter what we did or didn’t do in the past, we can take a step forward toward empathy, understanding and support right now, today, from the place we are.
Hi Laura,
Thanks so much for your exceptionally insightful comments. I just finished listening to a John Dehlin podcast on Prop 8 that you contributed to, and it was great.
All the best,
Chris
@Jim H – Jim says: “The church needs as many examples as possible of committed, Christlike, faithful gay men. We need more gay men who fill callings and attend the temple and faithfully, openly, lovingly stand as examples of truth and righteousness.”
Jim, I get what you’re saying here, and I agree with you to a point, but the problem is that in order for gay men (and lesbians — don’t forget lesbians!) to attend the temple (and, in many cases, to be seriously considered to hold most callings), they have to “renounce” their sexual orientation, call themselves “Same-sex Attracted” and not have a spouse. While I understand that there may be a place for this in the church, and in the lives of some individuals, I believe that what says the *most* about who we are as people is when we engage in loving, committed, faithful relationships. Seeing gay women and men who have lived faithfully with the same partner for 20 or 30 years, raised children together, been responsible, caring members of their communities — this is the sort of thing which tends to compel people to confront their stereotypes and prejudices, makes them stop and ask themselves why their own relationships are “better” than ours, why their families are more deserving of protection and consideration than our own.
I understand that you are qualifying your statement to suggest that gay people take on this commitment of celibate SSA “temple-worthy” membership for only a couple of years, like a mission, but I really don’t know that doing so and then moving on to join the ranks of the “inactive” in order to have a relationship says a whole lot to people. Most, I think, would assume that you simply “left the church” and “chose to act out on your same-sex attractions.” Happens all the time.
Now, what *might* be helpful is for gay Mormons in faithful, committed relationships to attend and get involved in their local wards to whatever degree they are allowed by the leadership to do so, attend faithfully, participate in everything they can, accept whatever callings the leadership might feel moved to offer them (assuming they aren’t simply shown the door), and demonstrate to the other members of the ward exactly what faithfulness and commitment look like.
This, however, requires a great degree of sacrifice as well, putting oneself in the position of Christ, to be spat upon and ridiculed, treated as a second-class citizen, subjected to lectures and scoldings and rants. And if the couple has children, I’m not even sure that it would be fair or right for them to subject their children to being raised in an environment which might attempt to teach them that their parents are not deserving of their respect.
I don’t know that there *is* any truly good solution to this issue.
I don’t want my children–I have three–to ever have anything to do with the Mormon Church. It hasn’t been a problem, because most of my family, in addition to NEVER visiting me where I live, NEVER inquires about my children. The dissonance between what the Mormon Church teaches them about homosexuals and my reality is simply too much for them to absorb–so ignoring the existence of my family is their only option.
Lorian, you bring up a lot of good points. You are right, I am sorry for making my previous comments completely male-centric. And I would not want anyone to “renounce” their sexual orientation. I was envisioning someone who is very frank and up-front about who they are, and even clear about the fact that when they meet the right person of the same sex, their desire is to settle down and marry that person.
I agree that your proposal of committed, long-term, same-sex couples would be immensely more effective – especially for changing people’s opinions of same-sex marriage – but I think it would be a lot harder to navigate in the current church, for all the reasons you listed.
I firmly believe the day is approaching when same-sex couples and their children are welcome in the church, but changing the hearts and minds of the members and leaders is a long process.
Thank you all for your thoughtful comments. As of this morning, this post has nearly 600 views. I know I am not alone in feeling sadness over the church’s actions. It heartens me that more are publicly stating their dismay. Change happens at a glacial pace in the church as we all know. I don’t know that the church will welcome lgbt members and their partners in full fellowship in my lifetime but I’d sure like to see them at least stop going on the offensive and attacking said unions.
It is worth mentioning as well that I’m in the Anoka Stake. There have been 8 suicides in the last 2 years in the Anoka-Hennepin school district. Several of these students were either gay or perceived to be and were bullied. (source: NY Times) Incidentally, Anoka is part of congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s district. Her husband runs a clinic at which homosexuals are “reoriented.”
When it comes to this ballot initiative, it really is a matter of life and death. What message is being sent to those kids by saying they have no part in a legitimate family?
Didn’t make it to the St. Paul stake. When I heard it, I suspected it was probably Anoka. Fits the demographic attitudes, I’m sorry to say.
There was a comment on another post that indicated the same thing or something similar was read in Elders Quorum in a Minneapolis ward.
I talked with the Anoka stake president for a long time a couple years ago I brought up my disappointment towards the church’s tactics in Prop 8. If I recall correctly, he indicated my feelings were not uncommon. He’s a decent fellow and I suspect (hope?) this directive came from SLC.
It boggles the mind why you would continue to associate with any religious organization that does not
support equality for all. If you can see that people should be able to marry whomever they choose to, male or female….surely you see through the rest of the lies and brainwashing that are part of not only the LDS faith, but religion in general.
Signed,
A former mormon-turned-proud-atheist
Not everyone who is part of a religion sees it in literal terms.
I agree….I just don’t get it. When the taking head is telling you something you know in your gut is wrong, how can you continue to be a faithful follower? If you said you were part of a non-denominational church that believed in equality for all, I wouldn’t ask why you associated yourself with it. I mean no disrespect. I just really don’t get it.
I long ago realized that the notion “Follow the Prophet” was misguided if only because our scriptures and history are replete with prophets making mistakes. Clearly, prophets are allowed by God to do Many Stupid Things and then, are left to reap the results. I believe that God talks to us if we listen and that God lets us go if we don’t. I stay in church because I think there isn’t another organization on the planet with the church’s capacity for good, if only it undertook such a mission. Also, our history has us on both sides of the issues of today so there is a clear road “walkback” into a better line. I stay for the people. I stay for the reality of the promise that a restored priesthood, even sleeping, is in the world. I stay because the church needs me much more than it would like to admit, and much more than I want to be there.
Thank you. Great post!
I definitely would prefer these letters didn’t exist, but part of me has appreciation – I’ve left the church, but the rest of my family has not. When they get letters like this read in church, they bring it up… And we talk about it… Without really messed up letters demanding people to fight against the rights of others, they would have no reason to ever ask questions…
No such letters were read in my ward. Now I’m afraid about subsequent weeks. I’d really hoped this nonsense would pass Minnesota by. Idiots, Minnesota already has a DOMA, it’s not even about marriage, it’s about codifying discrimination in the state Constitution. So sad.
I especially love your last paragraph. New topic: I thought many times during the whole California Prop 8 flap “WHY are we in bed with the born again’s and Jesus freaks who flipped me off and/or tried to run me and my companion over when I was a missionary in Orange County, CA? I still have nightmares about cars with Jesus or IXOYE fish on them……
Thank you for the well written post. As a gay Mormon who survived the Prop 22 and Prop 8 battles in California (before really coming out), it is sad to observe yet another state being the subject of a Mormon-led fight against marriage equality. I can only guess that the majority of people in future generations will look back on these repeated political campaigns by the Church against gay marriage with embarrasment.
i don’t understand why you think marriage is a “legal arrangement” and that religion has nothing to do with families or marriage.
So atheists shouldn’t get married?
Try this: get married in a church without a license from the state*, and see where it is recognized. Try to enjoy the benefits that come with marriage anywhere else – taxes, insurance, presumption of parenthood, retirement survivor benefits, etc. Watch as only you and your church recognize something extremely important to you. To anyone else, your are merely good friends. This is the case with many gay couples, many of whom are married in the eyes of their church, but not the law.
Atheists get married all the time, often without stepping a foot in a church, saying one word to a religious figure, or making a covenant with any deities. Their marriages are recognized by society, and their children get the benefits associated with it, including child support should the relationship be unsustainable.
Marriage is exclusively a legal arrangement, and always has been in this country. The freedom to believe is the freedom to not believe, and that means that marriage must be secular.
Churches are free to have (or not have) a sacrament, “holy matrimony”, or whatever they want, but society doesn’t care about nor recognize it. That’s for their benefit. If marriage were a religious matter, those churches which believe in equality for all would be having their beliefs oppressed, and their rights taken away.
* Texas and other states with common-law marriage excepted. It is possible in some states to be married without getting a license, but it is the exception, not the rule. It also does not confer all of the same benefits, and is somewhat risky.
Well said, Kathrin. Unfortunately for some, no amount of common sense will change their distorted views.
Exactly so, Kathrin. Civil marriage and sacramental (or religious) marriage are two separate institutions. One is a contractual relationship between a couple, overseen by the state and subject to civil laws, rewards and penalties. The other is a religious blessing, ordinance or sacrament (depending upon the religious organization involved), not required by the state, not able to be mandated by the state, and not able to be dissolved by the state, and not carrying any rewards or penalties other than those conferred or imposed by the religious organization granting the blessing/sacrament/ordinance.
Many people are confused by the fact that they entered into their civil marriage and their religious marriage in the same ceremony, overseen by their religious leader. But as you point out, they must obtain a license from the state in order for their marriage to be recognized, whether or not they have a religious ceremony. And the officiant who solemnizes their religious marriage with the authority granted to him/her by a religious organization must also be licensed by the state in order to formalize civil marriages, or their civil marriage will not be valid in the eyes of the state.
Further proof of the distinction between civil and religious marriage is evidenced by the fact that religious organizations which grant sacramental/religious marriages cannot grant divorces of civil marriage. Even if your religious organization, for instance, the Roman Catholic Church, grants you an annulment of your religious marriage (or the LDS church grants the dissolution of your temple sealing), you are still civilly married in the eyes of the state until you file for, and receive, a divorce from a civil authority. Likewise, the state cannot dissolve your religious marriage. Even if you are granted a civil divorce and are free to remarry in the eyes of the state, your church may still consider you married to your previous spouse until and unless you are granted an annulment or other religious dissolution of your religious marriage or sealing, as evidenced by the fact that the Roman Catholic Church can and does deny remarriage to persons previously married to another person, even when they have been divorced by the state, unless the church elects to grant the person an annulment of his/her prior marriage.
-Civil- marriage is a legal arrangement. What your church does is completely separate and doesn’t even require a church. (People have a justice of the peace solemnize it all the time.)
Religious marriage and civil marriage are two different things. Government has nothing to do with religion. Religion has nothing to do with government. Otherwise marriage would be in violation of the first amendment. They are distinct and separate.
Pingback: LDS leaders read statement to Minnesota churches referring to anti-gay marriage amendment | QSaltLake - Utah Gay and Lesbian News and Entertainment Magazine
I don’t know you, but I like the way you think.
Pingback: How the Mormons bashed gays in Nebraska too | POLITICAL MOSAIC
Thank you for your awesome post. I appreciate you speaking your mind and I completely agree. To the last paragraph and the Buddha quote, I say Amen.
Pingback: A follow up to The Gay Marriage post | Key Lime Piety
The LDS church has welcomed persecution for being “different” in the past. I remember singing, “I Am A Mormon Boy” as youth. Now the church leaders don’t want to be seen as different from the churches who do not have official polygamy in their past.
Times. Change, I guess.
See my blog as a life-long Mormon who is changing:
http://www.skepticalthayne.com
Whoever you are, please keep posting.
Good for you! You could let everyone know your concerns at your next testimony meeting. The “army of volunteers” you are amidst are ready to listen to what Heavenly Father may be revealing to you. You can say it’s o.k. to be gay and in love and married to someone of the same gender and you can say these things in the name of our lord and saviour Jesus Christ. I wouldn’t expect anyone to respond with anything other than “Amen”. Thanks for sharing your story.
Pingback: Letter Read to Minnesota Wards is Hauntingly Reminiscent of ’08 : Latest News
Pingback: LDS Church members in Minnesota encouraged to support anti-family legislation « unambiguous
Pingback: Let’s talk about The Gays again | Key Lime Piety
Pingback: » Hypocrisy and political motives Key Lime Piety
Pingback: » Minnesotans voted NO. HELL, NO! Key Lime Piety