AP Report on last night's Prop 8 fireside ....

[_Sethbag]

It's not the work of the Lord because there is no Lord. The Lord is a manmade concept, and it is used to justify all manner of works and attitudes of man. Prop 8 is not the least of these. But there is no Lord, no Sky Daddy, no Jehova, nor Elohim, out there somewhere who requires Californians to vote Yes on Prop 8. That's purely a figment of your imagination (and the imaginations of the LDS church leaders).

[_rcrocket]

Then this discussion isn't really for you is it?

You probably wouldn't say such a thing as ""in my opinion, trying to pass a consitutional [sic] amendment to discriminate against gays and lesbians is NOT "the work of the Lord" (as claimed by Russell Ballard), but the farthest thing from it," and then not back it up.

[_collegeterrace]

ya back for more Bob?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

But the tide is turning on that precedent, and none too soon, in my opinion.

Actually, not. The tide is going the other way as marriage initiatives such as Prop 8 are filling the books in states which did not have them, in reaction to the actions taken in Mass and Hawaii.[/qoute]
I was referring to the astounding decisions in Mass. and CA. We'll get a better idea when we see what happens to the Prop. 8's in this election.

The 14th amendment applies to many more than just blacks, including women, religion, etc. It's just a matter of time (when the U.S. Supreme Court gets the chance to make the change) before gays are included, precisely as the CA Supreme Court just did.

That is not logic. The law is what it is today. As I have indicated above, the tide is actually going against the Marriage Cases decisions, if one were to count numbers.

Trends are very logical, that's why we look at them. Gay rights are here to stay, and gay marriage is a no-brainer. In 20 years we'll look back and wonder why we were once so closed-minded (like many do now when it comes to the historical treatment of blacks).

I'm talking U.S. history. That's the whole point of our Constitution and jurisprudence -- keeping religion out of governmental rule and decisions. The Bible and Nicene Creed have no relevance to this discussion.

Oh well, narrow it down why doncha? God (at least, the Mormon version) doesn't get involved in U.S. politics? Hmm. where is my MX missile? Joseph Smith running for President? Prohibition? ERA? And then there's that pesky doctrine that the U.S. Constitution is divinely inspired.

The Brethren, not the Mormon God, get involved in politics.

I see "God and his action" as utterly irrelevant to this consitutional and legal issue.

Oops. Well the whole purpose for me coming out of retirement is to ask you to justify your post: "in my opinion, trying to pass a consitutional [sic] amendment to discriminate against gays and lesbians is NOT "the work of the Lord" (as claimed by Russell Ballard), but the farthest thing from it." It is OK if you don't want to address that particular question, the only one I am really interested in.

I've addressed the question as directly as I can. I honestly believe that the Church's heavy involvement in Prop. 8 is NOT the work of the Lord, but of homophobic Church leaders who are still stuck in the '50's. I see Prop. 8 as homophobic, but I do not view God as homophobic, nor one who would constrain individual freedom when it comes to a fundamental right like civil marriage. Ergo, the reason I do not think Prop. 8 is the work of the Lord.

by the way, it's good to see you come out of retirement.

[_rcrocket]

Acknowledging that we all sin and come short of the glory of God, I have a question for you, Rollo.

Is homosexual conduct a sin?

[_The Dude]

Except for the two states, marriage has not been defined as a civil right.

I count three: Massachusetts, California, and now Connecticut.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/ap_ ... x_marriage

[_Scottie]

This will be 1978 all over again except this time the stakes are much higher.

I predict that 20 year down the road, the LDS position will stick out like a sore thumb. By that time, anyone under 40 in the Church will consider the position to be an embarrassment and "the opinions of man". It will start to impact baptisms and LDS political leaders will find themselves awkwardly defending their position. Other universities will stop interacting with BYU and some will withdraw from sports competitions. BYU professors will be blackballed from conferences and the will not be invited to speak. Extreme right wing organizations will begin to align themselves more readily with the Church.

The Church will, in a few years, be forced to chose between gutting itself theologically or become a backwater church.

The LDS Church will not survive this fight in any recognizable form. Surely the brethren recognize this and hence the effort and money.

Yeah, and women will all get the priesthood too.

[_Scottie]

In terms of the "Lord," making this decision, well, I think that if St. Paul were around expressing his views, he'd be pulling out the abomination card.

Funny how one prophet's abomination is another prophet's ticket to the CK.

Funny how God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, yet He changes every decade or so.

[_rcrocket]

Funny how there is nothing to suggest that He has ever equivocated about homosexual conduct.

[_Jason Bourne]

See link below. in my opinion, trying to pass a consitutional amendment to discriminate against gays and lesbians is NOT "the work of the Lord" (as claimed by Russell Ballard), but the farthest thing from it.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i7Ee ... gD93MT0601

Well of course not. But then Ballard is the one claiming the speak for God. Are you?

Well this is difficult at least for me. Very conflicted.

One comment though. Is the broadcast an attempt to influence legistlation? If yes is employing the assets of the Church in such a broadcast in violation of 501(c)(3) which not only does not allow supporting candidates but attempting to influence legislation as well.