Quantcast

Comments about ‘LDS Church issues instructions to leaders on same-sex marriage’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Jan. 10 2014 1:45 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
TP
TWIN FALLS, ID

A Very respectful letter from the LDS Church Leaders regarding Biblical and eternal truths which protect 'civilization's heart', namely the Traditional Family Unit.

It may not/will not be popular in some segments of society, but then again,standing for truth has never been easy, and it will only get more difficult from here-on, to be sure.

May God Bless our nation leaders to:

-Protect and promote the 'Institution of the Family' as God has sanctioned from the beginning of time;
-Maintain and protect Religious Freedom and Matters of Moral Conscience;
-Uphold the Constitution (not re-define it) including States Sovereignty; and...

May He continue to protect this Great State, and nation to be a refuge of Freedom, Light and Truth for generations yet to come.

bandersen
Saint George, UT

baccus: Believe me when I say this! The whole Gay marriage thing is has been blown way out of proportion by the media and by those who are gay and want everyone else to validate it, regardless of any other point of view from God or citizen! To say that I don't support gay marriage because of what my leaders teach about it is so far off the radar to be ludicrous to even mention. For me, this is simple: It is an unnatural way of living and not only doesn't need a prophet's word, it doesn't need anyone's word. It comes under the title of common sense and intuition, which tells you something about the truth. the truth doesn't need any body's validation, least of all a prophets. Far from running my life, the prophet's word usually validate what I already knew to be true!

This absolutely is a right of the sovereign state of Utah to make. For those who don't understand the concept inherent in the 10th amendment, read it! Those words have meaning, despite those who want to press the delete button on our rights and freedoms!

bj-hp
Maryville, MO

Jeff in NC: I disagree with what you said. It will not hold the Church of Jesus Christ back. In fact, it will allow the Church of Jesus Christ to grow even more abundantly across the United States and the World. We are in the last days and this really spells out the prophesy that good will be called evil and evil called good.

This has never been about rights. It is completely and entirely a moral issues. Modern prophets have spoken and the Lord God has stated through his prophets his will as we get closer to the second coming of the Lord. President Thomas S Monson is the Lord's mouthpiece today just as Moses, Isaiah, Jacob, Abraham and others were in their day.

This will bring great calamities upon the United States. It may not happen right away but it will happen and when it does, people again will disobey the word of the living Prophets.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

The Church has also said,

You can be a Democrat,
pay your taxes,
go out and vote,
and obey ALL of the laws of the land [which includes speeding].

When members stop picking and choosing which Church statements to obey,
I will stop making comments of the DN articles.

Candide
Salt Lake City, UT

Christopher Hitchens said it best, “How dismal it is to see present day Americans yearning for the very orthodoxy that their country was founded to escape.”
Gays will be able to wed in all 50 states due to governor Herbert's desire to take this all the way to the Supreme Court and churches everywhere will lose the young people they so desperately need to keep. I see this as a win-win all around.

Owen
Heber City, UT

A verbal description of the Proclamation in conference: "it qualifies according to scriptural definition as a revelation, a guide that members of the church would do well to read and to follow.”
After editing by a prophet: "It is a guide that members of the church would do well to read and to follow.”
In this statement written by the legal/PR dept.: "doctrine."
Which is it? The church made similar statements in the past about interracial marriage and priesthood eligibility. It has always had the good sense not to canonize such statements. Let's hope inspired minds continue to trump legal/PR experts. Imagine the damage a canonized Proclamation on Race would have done 50 years ago.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

This is all well and good, but I still don't understand why people feel like they can force their standards and beliefs over everybody else. Believe what you believe and live your life as you see fit, and allow everyone else to do the same. Live and let live, people.

desert
Potsdam, 00

I am very glad the church goes into the fighting finally and declares peace.
It is comfort to all of us, that we do have moral obligations to include others in our midst, despite their believes. They are welcome in Utah and in the LDS church.
But no persecution please.

Maybe we all can join together in doing good to others, and remind us of the priorities in life, to bless those who seek truth and peace.

Reminds me of Moroni, when he said : "Wherefore, I, Moroni, am commanded to write these things that evil may be done away, and that the time may come that Satan may have no power upon the hearts of the children of men, but that they may be persuaded to do good continually, that they may come unto the fountain of all righteousness and be saved."

I believe the purpose of the church is to raise our awareness to repent and thereby making the purifying atonement available to us. Whatever people want to believe...but to be purified in Christ means to come unto Christ with full purpose of heart.
A very personal decision.

aubrey1
orem, utah

The church should have had more foresight than to fight ssm. I've always said that they should have instead lead the charge for equality. They could have done this by using their political influence to remove the institution of marriage completely from government control. Marriage benefits granted by the federal/state gov'ts have always been unconstitutional. In the place of "marriage" the corrected/new term might have been a legal status similar to power of attorney or partnership, then the word or term "marriage" would be mute and of no consequence. Most of us have no problem making things equal for all, it's the "marriage" word that causes conflict.
If the church is smart they will use their voice and resources to take marriage completely out of the gov'ts hands, change it to a legal status, then love people and keep the term "marriage" to be defined by churches or other institutions. Love all and give them freedom. A win win.

AlaskanWinnipegger
Palmer, AK

@no comment

I think that's one of the blessings for the tithing funds of the church. Yes, will the Church have to cut funding on some of it's programs (the discounted tuition for BYU, perhaps) - sure, but because the Church has frankly a better economic status than the US, it will be fine.

firstamendment
Lehi, UT

"no comment" you may be right about some things, sadly, we have learned little from the past because the media filters the truth, but that is not without precedence: "Another probable reason for Hitler's anti-Semitism is traditional Judaism's appreciation of women and its fierce opposition to homosexuality..." German-Jewish historian Samuel Igra in his neglected 1945 book, Germany's National Vice.

USAlover
Salt Lake City, UT

Fools mock, for they shall mourn.

So be it…

Saguaro
Scottsdale, AZ

I am not surprised by several comments that start out talking about marriage and end up talking about taxes. We often fear most, that others will do to us what we have done to them. Opponents of SSM would take away a tax exemption from Edith Windsor, married in a country that democratically chooses to recognize her marriage, and resident of a state that has democratically chosen to recognize her marriage. A majority of voters in places like Utah would take away from her an exemption for married people worth half a million dollars. Judges who saw that as unfair, are labeled activists.

The small minority of SSM couples do not want to take away any tax benefits from churches. They just want to get married, and to pay no more taxes than other married couples. Taxation without inclusion in civil rights may not be tyranny, but it certainly is an issue in any civil discourse about civil marriage.

waikiki_dave
Honolulu, HI

Read a bunch of the anti-marriage equality posts . . . I have got to strongly disagree with the good intentioned statements of Church members who try to characterize this issue as an attack on their religious freedom. Gay people have endured second class citizenship in this country for hundreds of years. Not to mention the stigma, exclusion and attacks by many so-called "kind and loving" christians. Church leaders have not helped the situation either (i.e. Boyd K. Packer, Spencer W. Kimball) who persistently labeled gay people as perverts who, in order to achieve God's eternal blessings, are instructed to live a mortal celibate life? I would call that hell on earth. No thank you. The Church will lose this battle on principle and it is way past due. Gay people and their supporters will not retreat in this battle one inch. The next step is to fight for the rights of gays in Africa, the Middle East and other countries where it's open season to brutalize human beings because of their god given sexual orientation.

Clinton
Draper, UT

@Blue AZ Cougar Since members of the Mormon church who commit adultery are typically excommunicated or at least disfellowshipped, and since homosexuality is a sin for some of the same reasons that adultery is, I would go out on a limb and say that while practicing homosexuals are welcome to attend church meetings, they likely wouldn't be allowed to be members of the church and therefore would not be eligible to hold any position within the organization.

Florien Wineriter
Cottonwood Heights, UT

A bold and welcome statement. Respect for individual ri9ghts and freedom is a rare commodity today.I hope this example will will begin to restore kindness and compassion to our jaded society.

bj-hp
Maryville, MO

Owen: You really do miss the point in that inter-racial marriage and the priesthood were not doctrine in the same sense as marriage. Marriage between man and woman has been doctrine since the beginning of time. It was doctrine in the Garden of Eden. It was doctrine in Egypt. It was doctrine in Israel at the time of Christ. It was doctrine at the death and resurrection of the Lord and it is doctrine today. It is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. The words of the "Proclamation to the World, The Family" is prophetic as it is basically taking all of the teachings pertaining to marriage and the doctrine into one document. Failure to see or understand that puts you at odds with the Lord Jesus Christ. This isn't the same as the statements on inter-racial marriage or the priesthood. Those who feel this will change don't understand the scriptures and don't understand the doctrine it is applied to. Heavenly Father defined marriage when Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden. That has not changed. Heavenly Father defined marriage at that time as marriage between man and woman.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

The moral strictures and goals of the Mormon Church are truly admirable, and I would encourage all practicing Mormons to work towards those goals...

In their own lives. Not collectively, but individually.

And, I would like to remind all practicing Mormons that your ability to practice your religion at all is protected by only one thin line in one Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Until that line was written, early America was filled with religious persecution. Minority religions were exiled from colonies, prohibited from office, routinely punished, tortured, even hung in public as examples to others, including our early Quakers. (look up "Boston Martyrs")

That Constitutional line, which gives us religious freedom, is a two-sided wall. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." If we cherish our religious freedom, we must also cherish the freedom of the government FROM religion, to accept that secular goals, led by science and sociology and equal treatment for all, must undergird the equitable law of the land.

Bob Pomeroy
Bisbee, AZ

It appears to me that there is great concern that adoption of same sex marriage laws may impinge on the temple marriages via the route that selective marriage practices show discrimination and that the governmental authority of the church to conduct marriages will be terminated. As central a threat as that is, I think it is doomed to failure. The church has dealt with marriage authority before, and practice of religion is what is protected. I fear the effects of repressing minorities in places where the church has great power and influence will generate more powerful resentment against it. An example is the forger who bombed people in SLC

DraperUteFan
Draper, UT

@TwoForFlinching, I would ask which side is really trying to force their standards and beliefs here.

LDS leaders are calling for civility and respect on both sides. LDS people have stated their position and it will play out in the courts. There is a moral and a legal component to this issue and if the law determines gay marriage is allowed, Mormons will uphold the law because that is also a tenet of our religion, but from a moral standpoint we are saying we stand in favor of traditional marriage, not against gay people.

It is a position that says marriage between man and woman is worth protecting as a unique and essential institution of society for the well being of civilization. You can of course disagree, but it is a matter of conscience for Mormons.

LDS people have never been in favor of forced anything. The thing nobody is talking about are the unintended consequences changing the definition of marriage. For example, what would then prevent someone from arguing prohibition of adult/minor relationships would be discriminatory? The decision to allow gay marriage opens up a potential Pandora's Box that most people have not yet even considered.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments