Rollo Tomasi wrote:I'm sure many (if not all) of us remember the letter dated May 25, 2006, and signed by the First Presidency (then GBH, Monson and Faust) addressing the upcoming U.S. Senate vote to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. The letter was read in sacrament meeting, and many understood it to instruct members to contact their senators and voice support for the proposed amendment. This bothered some (including myself) as an unwarranted involvement in politics and improper instruction to tell members how to be involved in the political process. Some TBM's claimed this was false because the letter did not explicitly tell members how to instruct their senators; I always thought the letter was intentionally vague on this point so that just this argument could be made.
I forgot to mention that the Church made this very claim recently (in Feb. 2008) during the Peter Danzig controversy. Danzig was a member of the LDS Orchestra at Temple Square (and had been since its inception). In June 2006, Danzig wrote a letter to the editor of the
Trib protesting BYU's dismissal of Jeffrey Nielsen and the Church's May 25, 2006, letter instructing members to contact their senators about the proposed federal amendment banning gay marriage. Danzig made the mistake in his letter of criticizing the Church's action vs. Nielsen and its stand on gay marriage. Danzig was summarily kicked out the Orchestra and reported to his bishop and SP, which led to over a year of discussions about Danzig's views and "opposition"; Danzig (and his wife) eventually resigned from the Church.
When Peggy Stack of the
Trib reported all this in a Feb. 2008 article, the Church issued a press release in response, essentially blaming everything on Danzig. One relevant part of the press release, in relation to the FP's May 2006 letter asking members to contact their senators about the upcoming vote on the proposed federal amendment banning gay marriage, read:
In reality Church leaders had asked members to write to their senators with their personal views regarding the federal amendment opposing same gender marriage, and did not request support or opposition to the amendment.
(Emphasis added).
I guess the Church hoped this would avoid any claim the Brethren were telling members how to deal with the issue. But everyone knew it was BS, and that the Church wanted members to do one thing: tell your senators you supported the proposed amendment.
Things have changed since 2006. Now, the Brethren have no problem instructing in explicit terms (rather than the subtle 'wink-winks' in the May 2006 letter) to support a proposed amendment to the CA state constitution. Truly, we are in the last days ....
