DiscussMormonism.com

SALT LAKE CITY: 26 May 2009: Today’s decision by the California Supreme Court is welcome. The issue the court decided was whether California citizens validly exercised their right to amend their own constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. The court has overwhelmingly affirmed their action.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes the deeply held feelings on both sides, but strongly affirms its belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The bedrock institution of marriage between a man and a woman has profound implications for our society. These implications range from what our children are taught in schools to individual and collective freedom of religious expression and practice.

Accordingly, the Church stands firmly for what it believes is right for the health and well-being of society as a whole. In doing so, it once again affirms that all of us are children of God, and all deserve to be treated with respect. The Church believes that serious discussion of these issues is not helped when extreme elements on both sides of the debate demonize the other.

These implications range from what our children are taught in schools to individual and collective freedom of religious expression and practice.

RAJ wrote:I wouldn't go too far in trying to interpret Church positions. What the Church says publicly re: civil unions (as a matter of politics and strategy) is slightly different then what it says privately. On page 188 of the 2006 CHI it says, in part:

"Any other sexual relations, including those between persons of the same gender, undermine the divinely created institution of the family. The Church accordingly favors measures that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and that do not confer legal status on any other sexual relationship".

The Church leadership will say whatever is strategically necessary in a given jurisdiction to prevail but privately this is their current position, "NO legal status on any other sexual relationship" --- other than a man and a woman.

DarkHelmet wrote:you would think with the economic problems in this country and around the world, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, nuclear bomb testing in North Korea, Iran and Israel facing off, an 11 trillion dollar debt that we're passing on to our kids, churches and governments would have more important things to discuss and debate. I would put the gay marriage debate way down the list of priorities right now.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:By saying the court's decision "is welcome," does this mean the Church does NOT oppose the civil union laws in CA (which the court said are equal to the marriage laws in CA)?

...

Rollo Tomasi wrote: Even Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman has come out publicly in favor of civil unions, but the Church has not disputed him (at least in public). It'll be interesting how the Church handles this.

moksha wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote: Even Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman has come out publicly in favor of civil unions, but the Church has not disputed him (at least in public). It'll be interesting how the Church handles this.

LDS Republicans on other sites have indicated that Governor Huntsman does not represent them or the Church and that he was acting solely due to his own conscience and compassion. When he was nominated to be the new Ambassador to China, many said openly that they were glad he was leaving Utah due to that "liberal" position on that issue.