?????The Church won?????t oppose hate-crime protections...?????

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_I have a question
_Emeritus
Posts: 9749
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:01 am

“The Church won’t oppose hate-crime protections...”

Post by _I have a question »

The Mormon Church said Thursday it doesn't oppose hate-crime legislation in Utah that includes protections for LGBTQ people, an announcement that could break a longtime legislative logjam on the issue.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sought to clarify that it has not been actively blocking hate-crime legislation and will not stand in the way if lawmakers take up the issue this year, said Marty Stephens, the faith's director of government and community relations and a lobbyist for the church.

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-mo ... story.html

So here’s the thing - the Church obviously feels that it is entitled to stand in the way of legislation it doesn’t agree with. Wait, what? A Church feels it is entitled “to stand in the way” of legislation it doesn’t agree with. Not just voice an opinion, but actively stand in the way. Does that mean the Church is in favour of Scientology standing in the way of legislation that it doesn’t agree with? Which religions does the Church think should also be entitled to “stand in the way”? Should gay people in Utah be grateful to the Church for, even though it could have, choosing to stand aside and let legislation on hate crimes pass?

Now where does that entitlement come from?
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will account for nearly 90 percent of the state Legislature this session, giving members of the faith outsized influenced in a state that is becoming slightly more religiously diverse.

When the new session begins Monday, LDS legislators will account for 91 of the 104 members, according to a Salt Lake Tribune story based on research of past surveys, campaign websites, members’ social media pages and direct calls and emails to some lawmakers.

That’s a much larger portion of the legislative body than Mormons have among the state’s 3.1 million residents. Members of the LDS church account for about 62 percent of the state’s population.

https://www.standard.net/news/governmen ... a7acb.html

There you have it folks, the Utah Legislature is simply the Church’s puppet.
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

Re: “The Church won’t oppose hate-crime protections...”

Post by _Philo Sofee »

IHAQ
There you have it folks, the Utah Legislature is simply the Church’s puppet.


Well they can't be anointed as literal kings in the land over the world like Joseph, Brigham, Heber, and John and others, so they take power in the politics. You DO know how the Elders of Israel are going to save the Constitution don't you? They'll re-write it with them in the leadership as kings. After all, the Kingdom of God is at stake. :wink:
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: “The Church won’t oppose hate-crime protections...”

Post by _moksha »

Wish the headline had read "Church Actively Supports Hate Crime Legislation".

The 90% of the Utah State Legislature who are Mormons would immediately get on board with this legislation, along with the 10% Democrats who are not Mormon.

Currently, the statement is merely a call for inaction by the Legislature. It was probably recommended by Kirton McConkie so the Church could deny culpability at some future date in a headlines case.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Post Reply