Activists hand-deliver letters to LDS Church

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • To: Question cont..
    Dec. 30, 2008 10:07 a.m.

    "There is a disconnect. I am no longer a member! The moderator refuses to post the rest of my story. I cannot be a member of an organization that will not allow me to quesion authority!"

    You have to understand something about the moderator.

    He/she is a mormon, who works in a job that's owned by the mormon church, a church who hates those who questions, who does not follow blindly. Sure you have free agency, as long as it's in accordance with that which is the church wants you to believe and act.

    That's why you've made the right decision to leave, as much as I have made the right decision to leave, and the only thing I regret is that I got involved in the first place, and took me more than 20 years to realize my mistake, which I am repenting of right now by leaving the mormons as far away from my life as possible.

    If only, I didn't join the church.

    In the very least, if only I left the church soon after, insteading of allowing myself to be so brainwashed to believe in so much lies the mormon church has taught me to believe

  • Leonard Purnell
    Dec. 29, 2008 3:47 p.m.

    Let,s get real! A "gay" union will never produce offspring. Such a union is not based on science or nature. Every species has male and female to continue the species. The concept is based on an incorrect principle. Male and female to produce offspring is everywhere in nature. It cannot be changed.
    If you want to live in an unnatural union go for it but don't expect others to make it or call it marriage because marriage has always been between male and female in order to propagate the species. It is not possible to change the species, it's against natural law. Never mind what religionists say. Think about it!

  • Question cont..
    Dec. 29, 2008 9:14 a.m.

    There is a disconnect. I am no longer a member! The moderator refuses to post the rest of my story. I cannot be a member of an organization that will not allow me to quesion authority!

  • To Re: Glad Left church
    Dec. 28, 2008 10:53 a.m.

    "Have you read the bible? If you have, you have not understood it. Homosexuality is sin."

    Nobody has said it's not a sin, but you've made yourselves to be ranked as high as Christ's executing His authority to judge amongst men.

    So you think you have read the bible, please show me where in the bible that Christ tells people like you to judge others?

    Please show me in the bible where you have been made to be the decider as to who sins and who does not, and to execute God's laws upon them?

    Please tell me where you have execised the laws of patience? The laws of turning the other cheeks?

    This eye for and eye and tooth for a tooth laws you Christians are living by, no longer exists, as it has been long fulfilled by Christ's laws.

    So, until you can show me then what you've read has been a waste of time, as you and many like you have nver truly understood.

    The scriptures are very diffucult to understand, Christ taught using a type of code, if you will, because only those who have genuine hearts and intent can understand it.


  • Re: You are wrong 10:32 p.m.
    Dec. 27, 2008 11:06 p.m.

    Actually, I believe they did do a homosexual study, in which they placed twins in two different families, one with a mother & father, and all straight children, and the other with a gay couple. The kid who was raised by the normal family ended up graduating high school, went to college, and got married to someone of the opposite gender. The kid who was raised by gay parents ended up being gay also, dropped out of high school, and works are a bowling alley.

    Think about it logically like this, if a man was placed on an island at a young age, and the only other people on the island were women, what are the chances that man would end up being gay? Probably a billion to one.

    Do a google search on Homosexual Genetic Tendencies, and you will find that no scientific evidence has been conclusive on genetic influence. It is all social/environmental influence. Article by Dr. Paul Cameron, Ph. D. states that the studies with homosexuals found that "Homosexuals overwhelmingly believed their feelings and behavior were the result of social or environmental influences."

    Maybe you should check your facts!

  • You are wrong
    Dec. 27, 2008 10:32 p.m.

    if you say science is on the side of the religious argument. You must be getting your information about science from your religious organization. All the scientific evidence that I read says it is likely genetic. They do sometimes find an element of environment possibly involved. But almost always the person knew it since they were a little child. No matter which it is (or sometimes a combination) religion is harmful when it tells these people that they must change because "god" is displeased with them. This has caused more harm than anything.
    Sometimes they try and find they can change a little, but this has been shown to be mostly pretend and have sad consequences in the end. There have been marriages end because some have tried and failed.
    YOU had better do your research (outside your church's information).

  • Re: The Deuce 8:36 p.m.
    Dec. 27, 2008 10:11 p.m.

    I feel the same way. Although, I am LDS, I don't understand that individuals comments either. Either you are with the church and the doctrine, or you are not. There really isn't middle ground, since one of the LDS doctrines is to support the church leaders, and in fact, in order to get baptized into the church, you have to agree to support the leaders.

    If you are LDS, you really have to support the leaders, and in supporting the LDS leaders, you should support their call for support for Proposition 8. Any members who say they "disagree with the brethren" should either repent and support the prophet, or admit they are not active LDS and give their recommend to their bishop until they are willing to begin supporting the leaders again.

    D&C 1:38= "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same."

    Remember, "by the voice of my servants, it is the same." LDS members believe the prophet speaks for the Lord.

  • The Deuce
    Dec. 27, 2008 8:36 p.m.

    I also agree with "Question for LDS Faithfull" that each of us should be willing to ask questions. I believe this is what Joseph Smith was all about. If he had not asked a very key question in his youth the LDS Church may not have been. From what I understand of the teachings of the LDS Church they are different than most other Christian religions. My question has to do with how much time and effort this individual put into learning the LDS religion and yet seems to come away with the understanding that you can believe the way you want and the Church leadership has nothing to offer you. Not being LDS I do not quite understand this individuals comments. If you are a member and have studied the doctrine as you stated, what is the disconnect between what the leaders state and what the doctrine states? It appears to me that you cannot believe their doctrine without beliving in their prophet. Did I miss something?

  • To We don't disagree 4:15 p.m.
    Dec. 27, 2008 5:30 p.m.

    "Why should 21st century people with much more scientific and humanistic knowledge concur with all of the prehistori times Bible?"

    If you really want to use the "modern" science argument with regards to same sex attraction, then you will find yourself quite disappointed.

    Science tells us that it is NOT genetic, NOT inherited, not inborn.

    Science has also shown that it is not immutable/irreversible.

    Seriously, the leaders of the pro-gay lobbies typically avoid scientific discussions for this very reason. If you read up on their literature, they try to couch all discussions in terms of "rights", and the focus is on marginalizing those who disagree with them (by using perjorative terms such as bigot and homophobe). Again, this is all in their literature and has been for some time.

    See Marshal Kirk and Erastus Pill, The Overhauling of Straight America, Guide Magazine (October-November 1987), and

    "After the Ball - How America will conquer its fear and hatred of Gays in the 90s".

    Science is actually on the side of your opponents, which is why you must truly rely on rhetoric.

    It's not a criticism, it is just the way it is.

  • Re: "Christians" are not all
    Dec. 27, 2008 5:10 p.m.

    "The LDS say they are Christian, but some of the other churches don't see them as such."

    Anyone who says the LDS church is not a christian church is completely ignorant, uneducated, and has not done their proper research! Even the church's name states it clearly: The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints.

  • Re: John Pack Lambert 3:53 p.m
    Dec. 27, 2008 4:56 p.m.

    The church has taken a stance, read the 12th article of faith. "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, magistrates, and in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law of the land."

    The law says illegal immigration is illegal (go figure!!) and the church follows the 12th article of faith and is obeying the immigration laws of the USA.

    There is legal immigration, which most countries already have in place. I believe your argument is the USA is not allowing ENOUGH immigrants in the country. The church will follow the laws which are already in place.

  • Re: The Blind Deseret News
    Dec. 27, 2008 4:50 p.m.

    And you are making comments on the comments page because...why??? If its so blind, why aren't you reading the liberal and "knowledgeable" SL Trib?

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 27, 2008 3:53 p.m.

    To the 10:59 commentator,
    The LDS Church has urged us to have compassion and caring in dealing with immigration issues. The scriptures tell us in Doctrine and Covenants 121 to have our "bowls full of charity towards all men". The Church has taken no position against immigration.
    We need to internalize the fact that all people are sons and daughters of our Hevenly Father, and stop acting like those people who happen to have been born on this side of some river deserve more than those born on the other. How are we going to ever be a Zion people if we do not follow the Savior's admonition to love our neighbors?

  • puzzled
    Dec. 27, 2008 3:30 p.m.

    Lost in all this ruckus is the fact that those who claim to be "gay" are not, they are angry. I object to the theft of a legitimate word as a description for a homosexual man. At least the women have a singular word. I am gay and happy to be so, but I'm not a homo. And I surely don't want to be identified by my sexuality.

  • Question cont....
    Dec. 27, 2008 2:55 p.m.

    So instead I will preach a message of inclusion, one of tolerance for all. LDS people make up around 2% of the world population with 98% of the world believing or practicing in some other way. I have learned to accept and not judge any person and I do not feel that one religion is better than another, instead I will let God be the judge. The most interesting issue I found as I studied LDS teachings was the concept of the godhead and the way other Christians think of the godhead and of Jesus Christ. LDS members try so hard to find the similarities between their teachings, that is the problem, the LDS view of the Godhead and Christ is much different, growing up I was always taught that LDS people and Christians believed in similar things, after 15 years of study I find stark differences in the teachings, less similarities, a lot more differences. I would just encourage people, especially LDS people to open their minds, don't be afraid to ask questions, in the end its what YOU believe that's important, not a church that tells you HOW to believe!

  • Question for LDS faithful
    Dec. 27, 2008 2:39 p.m.

    At the age of 8 I think that is the first time I realized I was a little different from other boys. I did not say a word for fear I would be looked at as sick or crazy so instead I became a scholar of LDS doctorine. I began to read everything I could find and was so interested in finding out everything about the evolution of the LDS church. I would often ask questions and continued to ask questions about findings all the way up to when I went on my mission. (Throughout this self study and reflection, I sensed the problem was same sex attraction, maybe all the late nights watching Indiana Jones??) Upon arrival to the mission field I studied even more intently, I was waiting and searching for that "burning feeling", I was told I "think too much with my head" so I tried to think just with my heart. After two exhausting years I came to a realization, my blood, sweat, my tears were not in vain. At the end of my journey I came to know Jesus Christ.

  • Re: The Blind Des News
    Dec. 27, 2008 2:29 p.m. mean that unless we look at a situation and think exactly like you do about it, we're blind, ignorant and incapable of rational thought?

    Wow, that's not blind, ignorant or unrational at all!

  • The Deuce
    Dec. 27, 2008 1:47 p.m.

    Does anyone ever read these comments and come away scratching their head as I do? People on both sides of this argument quote the Bible regarding the Gay issue and come away with different views of Christ's teaching. It appears that most people here have agreed that the Bible is a source of reference for the issue. First of all, let's establish the fact that the Bible continually speaks of repentance for sin. Second, Christ speaks of love for all but does not condone sin. Shall we all agree on these two points? If we agree on these two points the only issue that remains is what is classified as sin. I do not pass myself off as a Bible scholar but have read enough to understand that the Bible cannot be used by both sides to justify their point of view. One is either right or it is wrong. I have read the other comments how the Bible contradicts itself. Once again, if you understand the role of Christ you will understand the difference between some things written in the Old Testament and those in the New Testament. Gay rights are not the issue here.

  • The Blind Deseret News
    Dec. 27, 2008 8:40 a.m.

    It's disgusting to see the absolute and total ignorance (No this does not mean rude) of the Mormon's that have posted comments about this post.

    Sadly, the Deseret News is blocking almost all rebutals regarding the posts.

    But then again it's not as if the Deseret News were a credible news source anyway and it's not as if the DN readers were capable of critical reasoning.

    Oh, the blind leading the blind... welcome to Utah!

  • "Christians" are not all
    Dec. 27, 2008 6:40 a.m.

    the same! There are many varieties of "Christians" and some don't acknowledge that the other ones are even "Christian". People that view the Bible as a partial guide to life and who don't take it literally can still consider themselves "Christian". The LDS say they are Christian, but some of the other churches don't see them as such. The most people can learn to do is to agree to disagree because not all are ever going to all be the same.

  • utschmids
    Dec. 26, 2008 8:03 p.m.

    Wow isn't this really exciting. We all have choices to make in this great country, even who we may spend our lives with. At least, we have freedom to see and talk to who we choose to. All this situation will get worse, but we all have the choice to work together or we will always work against each other.

  • Re: We don't disagree
    Dec. 26, 2008 4:49 p.m.

    So, now there is no dispute about what Christianity stands up for, now the argument is "Why follow the Bible these days?" "Much of the world disagreeing with the Bible", possibly, but there are over 2 Billion Christians in the world today, and over 2 Billion Muslims who believe similar standards. Over 50% of the USA is Christian, so define "much of the world"?

    We can concur you are not a christian then, because, if you were, you would not question the Bible.

    If you want to know why the Bible is so important, I got a couple friends you should meet. Nice guys, roughly 19-21 years old, white shirts, ties, maybe you've seen them around riding their bikes! ;)

  • We don't disagree
    Dec. 26, 2008 4:15 p.m.

    that the Bible says it, but we disagree with the Bible on a number of things. Why should 21st century people with much more scientific and humanistic knowledge concur with all of the prehistori times Bible? If you do that's up to you, but you will find much of the world disagreeing with you now.

  • Romans 1
    Dec. 26, 2008 3:45 p.m.

    Is the part of the Bible that teaches homosexuality is a sin.

    Can anyone dispute that after reading it?

  • Re: Glad Left church
    Dec. 26, 2008 3:31 p.m.

    "His doctrine of love, acceptance, patience, long suffering, and especially, turning the other cheek, has only come forth by the church who loves them.

    I have heard of the venomous tone of lds people, that for "doctrine's" sake, which is stated nowhere in their scriptures nor the bible about gays, they spit their hate in the name of God.

    Spiteful, you lds are."

    First, your first statement characterizes Jesus as a loving person, but one who is happy with people regardless if they sin or not. Let us remember, Jesus always will love us, but he is not happy when we sin. John 14:16 "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

    Second, you claim its stated nowhere in the Bible that being gay is bad. Read Romans 1: 25-32. Romans 1:27-28 "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
    And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge.."

    Have you read the bible? If you have, you have not understood it. Homosexuality is sin.

  • Re: Re: Re: Human
    Dec. 26, 2008 2:01 p.m.

    "I guess you would be the kind of person that would consider the killing done in the name of God in the Bible, Book Of Mormon, and our entire civilization's history another form of love? Well then, do you want someone to love you like that? Would you welcome it with open arms? If so, you sound like a sadomasochist and so does your god."

    I believe Nephi receives an answer from the Lord about killing people in 1 Nephi chapter 4. Read it. The answers is there, I know it, and many others do, you just got to find it for yourself.

    2nd, to answer "If you hate sin", actually, Jesus taught to hate sin. That's not an LDS doctrine, that's a christian doctrine. If you are not christian, then I wouldn't expect you to believe it. But, Jesus taught it, therefore, as a believer in Jesus, I follow it. I found its true.

    And your example about hurting others, when you give children their shots at young ages to immunize them, don't they cry because the shot hurts? Then why do you still give them the shot? And what kind of hurting are the gays suffering from??

  • I agree with "Very Glad"
    Dec. 26, 2008 12:00 p.m.

    And I have done the same (three years ago too) Thanks for your comments and remember that we did good things too....
    But I'm just so glad and happy with the free feeling that I feel now.
    God Bless You and Happy 2009

  • VERY Glad To Have Left The Churc
    Dec. 26, 2008 11:43 a.m.

    This and many others the teaches me the truth about the lds church truly exemplefies the doctrine, " their fruits ye shall know them...." This fruit has soured and rotted in it's own arrogance of the true teachings of Christ. His doctrine of love, acceptance, patience, long suffering, and especially, turning the other cheek, has only come forth by the church who loves them.

    Another doctrine teaches, "What good is it to love those that loves you?"

    I have seen and tasted of the fruits of the lds church for more then 20 years, and since I left the institution some 3 years ago, I am feel like a fool for being such a deep part of it, and for being fooled to follow doctrines that are of man, and not of Christ.

    I have sinned for having been an lds, and I feel dirty to follow counsel that are so destructive, so arrogant, and so un-Christ like.

    I have heard of the venomous tone of lds people, that for "doctrine's" sake, which is stated nowhere in their scriptures nor the bible about gays, they spit their hate in the name of God.

    Spiteful, you lds are.

  • re:Re: Hmmm | 11:13a.m. Dec. 26
    Dec. 26, 2008 11:42 a.m.

    I have read both the bible and the Book of Mormon, many times.

    I guess you would be the kind of person that would consider the killing done in the name of God in the Bible, Book Of Mormon, and our entire civilization's history another form of love? Well then, do you want someone to love you like that? Would you welcome it with open arms? If so, you sound like a sadomasochist and so does your god.

  • Re: re:Re: Hmmm
    Dec. 26, 2008 11:13 a.m.

    "And how do you demonstrate that love, Mr. Christian? Love is more than a word, it involves action. If your action of loving is "calling the sinners to repentance and voting yes on taking away marriage rights" keep it to yourself!"

    I assume you are not a christian, therefore, you probably haven't read the New Testament and you don't know what Jesus actually taught.

    First, Jesus did teach to love everyone. He taught that the 2nd greatest commandment is to "love thy brother as thyself." Basically, treat everyone how you would want to be treated. But, the first commandment is to "love God with all thy heart, might, mind, and strength." This commandment precedes the 2nd.

    Jesus did love everyone, but his ultimate goal is to assist everyone to get back to Heaven. Living a sinful life is not going to do that, this is why he called people to repentance. He loved them enough to ask them to change so they could live with God again.

    Calling people to repentance is a sign a love.

    If you want scripture references, for Jesus loving everyone, check John 13:34. For Jesus calling people to repentance, check Matthew 4:17.

  • If you hate a sin
    Dec. 26, 2008 10:57 a.m.

    then don't participate in it! But don't hurt the people by forcing your feelings on them. Some say that "we are not hurting them", but they are telling you that you are hurting them. Don't you believe them? Apparently not. You are headed in the right direction when you say "Love The Sinner" (because we are all sinners)...but where you are wrong is in the way you "hate the sin". You can do this inside (it's your opinion), but you shouldn't put your opinion on other people (because it's not necessarily their opinion). People all over the world have different opinions about lifestyles and behavior and unless this behavior hurts and forces others (such as in the case many time with polygamy) then we shouldn't force our opionions on others.

  • re: Frustrated & Sad | 9:26 a.m.
    Dec. 26, 2008 10:59 a.m.

    I would content that they are indeed apostates.

    What is equally perplexing about this is those that belong to a particular political party and whether they be a council member, mayor, congress-person, governor, senator, etc; during the week - they can say abortion rights, gay rights, leave the border open. But, when it comes time for Sunday they have such a pious attitude; they preach no abortion, no gay, close the borders. This is what hypocracy, apostacy is all about. Beware of the sheep in wolf's clothing.

  • Frustrated & Sad
    Dec. 26, 2008 9:26 a.m.

    This might have been addressed already (i didn't read all of the posts) but I'm tired of "active members" disagreeing with an official statement or position of the Church.

    When you raise you hand and sustain President Monson as a Prophet of God, you acknowledge that he speaks for the Lord, and whether it be out of his mouth or God's it is the same.

    Yes, you have agency, but that is exercised in the sustaining. Once you have done that, any opposition that you express against the Prophet or the Church is clear-cut hypocrisy.

    If you don't want to follow every official stance the Church has, then don't raise your hand every six months - in fact, you should probably raise it in opposition.

    I won't go so far as to call you apostate, but you're well on your way.

  • re:Re: Hmmm | 12:48 a.m. Dec. 26
    Dec. 26, 2008 9:18 a.m.

    And how do you demonstrate that love, Mr. Christian? Love is more than a word, it involves action. If your action of loving is "calling the sinners to repentance and voting yes on taking away marriage rights" keep it to yourself! I personally think the actions of most christians are evil, I don't hate christians, I just hate their actions, their desire to marginalize other people and make them be subservient to a mortal and fallible religious authority (Pope, Prophet, Priesthood). So because I love you christians, I am going to propose an amendment to make every civil contract you make (marriage..etc) invalid. I do this so I can call you to repentance and help you see the light, that while I and God love you, we cannot support, condone, or tollerate your actions. Think of the children!

  • Re: Hmmm
    Dec. 26, 2008 12:48 a.m.

    "Seems to me if you loved them as people you'd see how Prop 8 hurt them as people, not for their actions.

    For people that insist they love homosexuals, you sure sound hateful to me. "

    First, how did prop 8 hurt the homosexuals? Did we torture them? Did we imprison them? Did they lose their jobs because of it? Did they suffer any physical damage because of prop 8? Answer= No. Homosexuals can still act and be homosexuals. Nobody is forcing them to do anything differently. The only thing they can't have is a marriage license. Does that change their every day behavior? No.

    Prop 8 hurt them? So, before May of 2008, homosexuals were always suffering in California? Why did they stick around for 158 years in California then? Your logic seems a bit off.

    And the words I express were directed towards actions, not people. Homosexual activity is a sin. Christians love sinners, and therefore, as a christian, I love all people, including gay people, but christians hate sin. Therefore, I hate homosexual activity. I cannot condone, support, or agree with it, but I will still love the sinner, just as Jesus did. WWJD.

  • RE: Hmmm | 9:28 p.m.
    Dec. 25, 2008 10:02 p.m.

    Thanks for the textbook example of the GLBT activist rhetorical strategy at work. "If you don't say what I want to hear, and say it the way I think it should be said, I'll call it hate."

    There was nothing inherently mean, spiteful, or hateful in the interchange itself. Just one person telling the other that because they insisted they couldn't have something they wanted, they hated them.

    That's the activist game in a nutshell, folks. "Give us what we want or we'll accuse you of hating us."

    May the honest and decent among the GLBT--and there ARE plenty--will tell you people and the world that your strategy and rhetoric is every bit as unethical, underhanded, and yes, even HATEFUL as those you accuse of "hate"--and even more so.

  • Hmmm
    Dec. 25, 2008 9:28 p.m.

    Seems to me if you loved them as people you'd see how Prop 8 hurt them as people, not for their actions.

    For people that insist they love homosexuals, you sure sound hateful to me.

  • Re: Re: Re: Question
    Dec. 25, 2008 6:12 p.m.

    "By supporting Prop. 8 the Church DID NOT call homosexuals to repentance, but rather, in a sense, took away their agency. Regardless of if your Church supports homosexual religious marriage, the LDS Church just helped remove the civil rights of a whole group of people."

    The Civil Rights Act of 1964 Section 703 (a) states that it is unlawful to discriminate any individual based on: Race, Color, National Origin, Gender, or Religion.

    Sexual preference is not a civil right. Get your facts straight.

    People who are gay deserve basic human rights, such as equal medical coverage, equal employment opportunities, and hospital visitation rights.

    The right to marry is a marriage between a man and a woman. California just voted so, majority voted that way. Why are the gays trying to overrule the majority? Going around the law?

    Its time for the gays to admit they lost and accept it.

    As always, we love the gays as people, but their actions is what we hate.

  • Re: Re: Re: Question
    Dec. 25, 2008 5:49 p.m.

    "the LDS Church just helped remove the civil rights of a whole group of people."

    Civil rights are rights given to people to protect things they are born with, things they cannot control. Examples include race, gender, color, national origin, age, or disability.

    By you saying that gays deserve "civil rights" you are assuming that sexual preference and homosexual activities are given at birth. Homosexual activities are a choice, not a "born with" characteristic. Just because the LDS church stood up for what they feel is right concerning choices, doesn't mean they are taking away agency. Does that mean we are taking away agency for people who want to commit incest by creating laws to prevent it? Or laws to prevent drunk driving?

    If you think my comments sound hostile, "the guilty taketh the truth to be hard."

    And, to prove my point, gays and lesbians couldn't marry for thousands of years, so what rights are we taking away? They never had the "right" to marry before, so why now? Prop 22 passed in 2000, but in 2008, for 5 months, gays could marry. Are you saying this is the only period in history in which they had rights?

  • ReRe: Question
    Dec. 25, 2008 3:09 p.m.

    That sounded rather hostile.

    By supporting Prop. 8 the Church DID NOT call homosexuals to repentance, but rather, in a sense, took away their agency. Regardless of if your Church supports homosexual religious marriage, the LDS Church just helped remove the civil rights of a whole group of people.

    Prop. 8 had nothing to do with the actual physical act of homosexual intercourse - the so called sin.

  • Re: question
    Dec. 25, 2008 2:21 p.m.

    Jesus did show love to the prostitute and adulterer, but he also called those people to repentence. He did NOT accept their sins as OK. He told them to change, but he said it with love. He never accepts sin as being OK. It's always wrong to sin.

    Therefore, with that logic, we love the sinner (the homosexual), but hate the sin and will not accept their actions as being Christlike. Gays have their agency, you can still perform your sinful acts, but when you ask me to support you, I will not, and Jesus won't either! But He and all people will and should still love you.

    Does that answer your Question?!

  • Question
    Dec. 25, 2008 2:03 p.m.

    I have a question. Why does a Church that promotes the inclusiveness of all people, essentially destroy a group's rights for happiness in California? I am not saying that homosexuality is right one way or the other, merely that if Jesus loved prositutes and adulterous women, why can't the LDS people love homosexuals?

  • Naggle
    Dec. 25, 2008 12:56 p.m.

    LDS Church will never accept gays nor there livestyle. You people need to get over yourselves. Gayness is just wrong and you all needto give it up. YOU WILL NEVER MARRY IN THE TEMPLE.

  • Michaelitos
    Dec. 25, 2008 9:21 a.m.

    When will people understand that careful word choice is about meaning, not semantics. There is a difference between "not opposing" and "supporting", just as there is a difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance".

    There should be NO expectation that the Church will support any LGBT-aimed legislation. It is not their prerogative.

  • Hard
    Dec. 25, 2008 9:13 a.m.

    It is difficult. I have good friends who have homosexual tendencies. Some act on these tendencies, others don't. Some are members of the church, others are not. The bottom line - these people should have civil liberties - the right to protection, the right to pay taxes etc. They should not have the right to marry because there is some element of environmentalism in this behavior. I'm not saying there is nothing innate here, but environment matters. Raising a child with 'two mothers' or 'two fathers' will influence the child. Homosexuality is biologically incorrect. Gender matters.


  • Actually, Bev
    Dec. 25, 2008 8:50 a.m.

    I think the board has a lot of people like me that used to be members and who either are not anymore, or don't partipate. You don't have to're safe. We are nice people that just live in reality.
    Merry Christmas!

  • Re: to What Hate
    Dec. 25, 2008 12:25 a.m.

    "it takes something dear from the LGBT community."

    Um, something they have only had for 5 months? Is it really that dear? Remember, prop 22 banned gay marriage back in 2000.

    For thousands of years, gays have not been able to marry, does that mean we have been extremely uncivil, hateful, terrible, narrow-minded people for thousands of years? No. Only when the gays and lesbians classify their actions as a "race" or "characterstic" of their personality does everyone take offense to it. As if the mormons took the right away from the gays to marry. Um, reality check, California voters took the right away from California gays to marry. Prop 8 only affects California, not any other state. And, another reality check, there are only 500,000 mormons in California, but yet over 5 million voted Yes on prop 8? Those other 4.5 million votes came from non-mormon California citizens.

    As always, love the sinner, hate the sin.

    Mormons legally and lawfully voted, didn't vandalize any property, and took care of business with class. What about the anti-8 side? How much class does it show when you vandalize Mormon church buildings? Where is your class? But, we still love you.

  • Re: Hendrix | 7:35 p.m.
    Dec. 24, 2008 2:21 p.m.

    As much as I am for gay rights, I don't think Adam and Eve are going away ---

    Cool --- Adam and Eve --- fine --- even in a nation of a separation of Church and state --- Adam and Eve are still taught in the public school --- and I have no problems with it.

    Case in point --- Mark Twain's rendition of Adam and Eve --- so he did take some satire, but nonetheless he did make reference to a religious story known to three of the world's main religions.

    Another one --- Paradise Lost by John Milton --- a classic Adam and Eve story --- and a classic in literature ---

    John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress.

    Going away as fable? Not by any means --- It is alive and well.

    Others: The history of Western Art from the first century to a good deal of the Renaissance --- it is nothing but religious --- Sistine Chapel, Michalangelo's Madonna and Child, etc. --- the study of these in public schools I do not believe are going away.

  • RE: Anonymous@12:53 p.m.
    Dec. 24, 2008 1:14 p.m.

    Sorry, but this is pretty much what I'm hearing from you:

    "Anything we don't like is HATE."

    "Anyone or anything that opposes what we want is HATE."

    "Anybody who disagrees with us is a HATER."

    "Anybody who thinks we're wrong to do what we're doing HATES us."

    "Any church that agrees with us is on our side and deserves freedom of speech and worship; any church who doesn't HATES us and should have no right to speak out--and if they do, we'll threaten, harass, and even terrorize them. But that couldn't possibly be HATE, because we're the ones doing it in the name of our 'rights'!"

    That's a pretty darn selective and convenient definition of HATE. More or less, you get to say what HATE is and isn't, right? Are you aware of where such means-ends thinking divorced from a sense of morality, humanity and decency have led us in the past--anywhere from the French Revolution to Wounded Knee and Auschwitz?

    Homosexuals in and of themselves don't scare me. I know many decent gay people. But the way you activists are thinking DOES scare me--and your IDEOLOGY is precisely why you shouldn't win this debate. EVER.

  • To Frankly speaking
    Dec. 24, 2008 1:06 p.m.

    In California, again, about 52,000 children are being raised by sets of gay parents. As a society, what have we to say to those children? That their families are less of a family because they do not fit the profile of a Mom and a Dad? The introduction to King and King is a lesson about tolerance, not indoctrination. If it were indoctrination, as some parents are wary it might be, all the gays today would have turned out straight, when they were indoctrinated in the straight mold after listening to straight fairy tales when they were in the second grade --- the likes of Prince Charming rescuing Rapunzel, Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty. King & King does not indoctrinate about homosexuality anymore than straight fairy tales indoctrinate about heterosexuality.
    Another fault in the logic of King & King following the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts is that the teaching of books such as King & King will follow precipitously after gay marriage becomes final in California. King & King is already being taught in many school districts, again, to teach tolerance, not to indoctrinate.

  • To Frankly speaking
    Dec. 24, 2008 1:05 p.m.

    The other side to the story --- Opponents of Proposition 8 and educational professionals insist that Proposition 8 is about marriage, not about education. Moreover, the teaching of tolerance is done at a local level, not a state level. Case in point, the Joseph Estabrook Elementary School, where the King & King teaching took place, the teaching was done with the approval of the superintendent of schools. To liken that to California is in many ways similar. Schools officials at the local district level determine the adequate age-appropriate curriculum for school children. Most school websites at the district level contain a listing of district-approved curriculum.

  • to Frankly speaking | 4:31 p.m.
    Dec. 24, 2008 1:04 p.m.

    Myth: Schools will be forced to teach about same-sex marriage and parents will not be able to stop it.
    Fact: The story stems from Massachusetts, where one school district, in particular, took it upon itself to use the book King & King. For want of better evidence, Proponents of Proposition 8 are lacking to show that the practice of teaching homosexual relationships or indoctrination as they would call it, even happens. The incident is singular, particular to one school district, and at that, specific to one single teacher. Placed against the tens of thousands of teachers that the state of Massachusetts currently hires, I believe the incident is blown out of proportion. Moreover, proponents of Proposition 8 sidestep the issue that school districts determine the school curriculum. The issue is much more local than it is state. Moreover, one may ask: is a single book responsible for the indoctrination of little minds, as they would put it? As it is, students grade K-12 are taught from as many world views as they have teachers

  • to What Hate | 10:42 a.m.
    Dec. 24, 2008 12:53 p.m.

    I concur ---

    While I have not used four letter words against the LDS, I believe the passing of Proposition 8 is itself a hateful thing because ---

    it takes something dear from the LGBT community.

    Did the LGBT community vote away any marriage rights away from the LDS? If they had, that would constitute hate.

    Was the campaign ran on the merits of a clean campaign or feeding on people's phobias? That constitutes hate.

    While we heard the same slogan "Churches have a right to defend morality" that is not what we saw in the campaign. That in itself constitutes hate.

    When LGBT people in many states have to marry again, enter into a domestic partnership, then the partnership is dissolved, then reanacted again, some couples have had to re-enact their ceremonies many times over as the laws have changed.

    That constitutes hate.

    When people are told, our hetero relationship is a marriage, even though 50% of them end in divorce... and in the next breath they say, no, you gays cannot have marriage...

    that constitutes hate.

    When people call the highest law in the state of California "activist judges" that constitutes hate.

  • To Standard of Truth | 9:08 p.m.
    Dec. 24, 2008 12:37 p.m.

    We get it about "The Standard of Truth"

    "Our missionaries are going forth to different nations,... the Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done" (HC 4:540)

    It's a standard based on religious freedom.

    We honor and respect to worship as you will.

    All we gays ask is for our freedom to exercise our freedoms too --- and, by the way, most gays are not bashing and doing hate crimes against your churches ---

  • Regarding LDS gay marriage
    Dec. 24, 2008 12:22 p.m.

    Some people are mis-quoting or perhaps they are not informed as to the Church's right preventing gay marriage.

    The LDS Church and its leaders know that heterosexual marriage is alive and well --- At that, for those who do not know ---

    Temples marriages in LDS temples are only allowed for ---

    hetero couples
    members in good standing

    and even in places where same sex marriages is legal --- the Church has not lost its authority to rule out gay marriages.

    So people, rest easy --- to say otherwise is speaking out of phobias, myths, and distortions ---

  • To Rights Vs. Privileges
    Dec. 24, 2008 12:06 p.m.

    Wrote: "Do they deserve medical coverage? Absolutely. Do they deserve hospital visitation rights? Absolutely. Do they deserve to be able to marry and adopt children? No. Absolutely not.

    Marriage is between one man and one woman. That's the churches stance, and it is not going to change"

    I think you said exactly what the LGBT community is trying to do in Utah --- to find a middle ground where gay people and the conservative majority in Utah have in common. If we cannot agree on our differences, we can perhaps agree on what we have in common.

    And in the meantime we can all enjoy our Christmas.

  • Roger
    Dec. 24, 2008 11:57 a.m.

    You people don't get it ---

    You live in your own little world thinking this is over.

    Nope --- You started this --- and the best you can do is revert with name-calling ---

    The facts, you ignore, but you're really good at the name-calling.

    All this in the name of "we love gays" always followed by "except"

    "we love gays but... (fill in the blank)
    ... this is getting old
    ... they're sissies
    ... they already have equal rights
    ... they can already marry women and the lesbians already can marry men
    ... marriage is not a right, it's a privilege
    ... they're little women (that particular comment posted 6:55 Dec 22) offended both gays and women in one fell swoop. Is this the way you feel about your women? Do you supress them? Do you keep them beneath men? --- I would hope not.

  • Roger
    Dec. 24, 2008 11:49 a.m.

    To Anonymous | 4:17 p.m. Dec. 22, 2008

    What are you saying? I would never walk into a Church hand in hand with my partner if I know I am not welcome.

    It's called respect.

    I would respect the Church's stand on not allowing homosexuality --- that's their prerogative --- but for you to say to go ahead and make light of it and substitute "cats and dogs" for children is downright offensive.

    And people wonder who's intolerant?

  • RE: to What Hate | 10:42 a.m.
    Dec. 24, 2008 11:45 a.m.

    "It is not hate for Mormons. It is hate for their actions. They took something dear away from these people and they expressed their anger. It is no more hate for Mormons than Mormons showed towards gays by claiming they were unworthy of the word 'marriage.'"

    Uhhh... right... Care to twist the logic of that argument some more, or has all the exertion of it exhausted you? That's some darn hard work there!

    "What Hate," you know as well as I do that if any idiot tried to argue that Mathew Shepard's killers weren't showing hate for him as a person, but simply hate for his actions, this board would quickly have 1,000 furious comments from GLBT and fair-minded non-GLBT alike. As well it should--that argument would be just as RIDICULOUS, and just as FALSE!

    Now for some cold hard facts: HATE SPEECH IS HATE SPEECH. HATE CRIMES ARE HATE CRIMES. This is so whether it's a gay man mercilessly slaughtered in Wyoming or a mob of anti-religious bigots waving signs, screaming slogans, beating those who object, descrating chapels and temple grounds, or mailing white powder. It's all HATE. So stop the denial--and the HATE, too.

  • Interesting
    Dec. 24, 2008 11:31 a.m.

    Say, has anyone forgotten what tonight and tomorrow is being celebrated about? Perhaps you have or maybe not, so much hatred on this board.
    All gay love is just sexual sin, nothing to express such hatred for. Say, by the way, since so much scripture is being thrown around, when will you turn your hatred against the adulterers and the fornicatures?

  • I think....
    Dec. 24, 2008 11:21 a.m.

    If Jim and Joe showed up in the time of Christ??? I think he would have healed them of their homo'ishness.

  • re:re: Anonymous 1:53p.m. | 10:3
    Dec. 24, 2008 11:21 a.m.

    "Oh, we know that. But to paraphrase a fabulous talk by Floyd Weston, we're not looking for what's popular, we're looking for what's true. Big difference. Ever hear the old saying, "what's popular isn't always right, and what's right isn't always popular"? That's exactly what this is. Of course we'd love it if more people would open their hearts and join the church and feel of God's great love for us, but if they don't, that's between them and God. He determines what's right and true, not the people who are popular in the eyes of the world."

    So could that mean that the popular vote on Prop 8 could not be right? lol...

  • billy
    Dec. 24, 2008 10:49 a.m.

    I have heard some gays giving up that lifestyle, going straight and getting baptized. The Book of Mormon does change lives.

  • to What Hate
    Dec. 24, 2008 10:42 a.m.

    "Now, look at the gay activists protesting in front of the LA temple. Signs, marching, megaphones, lots of 4-letter words, etc. That is hate if I have ever seen it. You will never see mormons marching in front of the gay pride parade with signs and megaphones and calling them 4-letter words. "

    It is not hate for Mormons. It is hate for their actions. They took something dear away from these people and they expressed their anger. It is no more hate for Mormons than Mormons showed towards gays by claiming they were unworthy of the word "marriage."

  • Mark
    Dec. 24, 2008 9:27 a.m.

    I said gay mormons getting sealed in lds temples.

    Same sex gay mormons marrying for all time and eternity in lds temples.

    I said lds gays, not the non member gay community going into our temples.

    Don't read something there that isn't. Just read!

    The prophet would never ever allow it to happen.

  • Insomniac the act
    Dec. 24, 2008 9:17 a.m.

    Hey Bev! You have it right. You truly ruffled a few unrighteous feathers on here. LOL! Take a look at the time posted messages came in 2:19 a.m.. They can't sleep because they are so angry at you. LOL!

  • Re: Bev
    Dec. 24, 2008 2:19 a.m.

    The members of the LDS Church are not perfect. If you expect they should be, then you haven't read your scriptures. The LDS Church believes, as almost all christian churches do, that Jesus was the only perfect person to live on this earth. Why, then, do people expect mormons to be perfect?? Mormons make mistakes just like any one else in this world.

    The churches stance has always been that the church, as an institution, is perfect, but its members are not.

    Stand by that. Its true. The church is perfect, the members are not. The goal of the members of the church is to become perfect like Christ, but no one has reached it, except Christ himself.

    Do not expect perfection from any member of the church, or you will be let down.

    You must also always remember the words of Lord on this topic, found in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 64, verse 10: "I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men." If anyone makes a mistake, it is your responsibility to forgive any trespasses against you.

  • What Hate?
    Dec. 24, 2008 2:10 a.m.

    I haven't heard a single word of "hate" on here towards gays. The only thing the church is saying is we LOVE the gay people because they are children of our Heavenly Father. We LOVE them. LOVE. No hate. But, the homosexual acts they commit are an abomination in the sight of the Lord. The acts are an abomination and are sinful, not the person themself, but the sinful acts are. The acts, not the person.

    Love the sinner, hate the sin.

    We do not hate anyone or any people. We hate sin. WE hate only sinful acts. No hate on people.

    Now, look at the gay activists protesting in front of the LA temple. Signs, marching, megaphones, lots of 4-letter words, etc. That is hate if I have ever seen it. You will never see mormons marching in front of the gay pride parade with signs and megaphones and calling them 4-letter words.

    Finally, the Lords and the churches stance on this issue can be found in the "The Family: A Proclamation To The World" issued by the First Presidency and 12 in September of 1995. Read it.

  • My Letter
    Dec. 24, 2008 12:26 a.m.

    Dear Rights Vs Privileges,
    I agree with you. I sometimes look back at our countrys history and wonder how much easier life in America would have been for people of certain minority groups, had they been able to keep their race in the closet. Many Native Americans would have changed there racial orientation on the Trail of Tears. More African slaves would have kept their racial identity secret in order to avoid the horrors of slavery. During WWII, some Japanese Americans would have suppressed their overwhelming passion to be Japanese. More Jewish, Polish and Mexican immigrants would have had kept their racial preferences on the down-low.
    Seriously, marriage is a religious sacrament, based on the Bible or Torah, PERIOD. Prerequisite for this religious rite is one man and one woman. IT IS WHAT IT IS.
    If you lead an alternative lifestyle, consider a marriage alternative. Why infringe upon any religious organizations right to define its belief or practices? Sacraments such as, Baptism, Confirmation, The Lords Supper, Anointing the sick, Matrimony, and the like are all ideas formed by traditional Christians, the majority of whom would not like to have these ideas redefined. Marriage is their intellectual property.
    LDS stay strong!

  • RE: RE: BEV 11:37 PM
    Dec. 24, 2008 12:11 a.m.

    For having beliefs we are not willing to compromise?

    On the other hand, I find it hypocritical to preach tolerance, then burn and damage churches when they don't agree with your point of view.

    I also find it hypocritical to say the "majority rules" when the outcome of an election goes your way, but when it doesn't, you sue and demand the outcome be overturned.

    Ok, whatever?

    JASON M.

  • Re: Bev
    Dec. 23, 2008 11:37 p.m.

    Why are the LDS hypocrites? For having beliefs we are not willing to compromise?

    On the other hand, I find it hypocritical to preach tolerance, then burn and damage churches when they don't agree with your point of view.

    I also find it hypocritical to say the "majority rules" when the outcome of an election goes your way, but when it doesn't, you sue and demand the outcome be overturned.

  • To: re: Anonymous 1:53p.m.
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:38 p.m.

    "As strongly as you believe about YOUR relgion, that's EXACTLY what others believe about THEIR religions. Muslims believe their clerics are God's "mouth piece". Catholics believe the Pope is also his "mouth piece". They, along with many others, believe their religions are "established by God". The difference? There are BILLIONS of adherents, whereas Mormons represent less than 0.01% of the Earth's population. Don't be so darn ignorant!"

    Oh, we know that. But to paraphrase a fabulous talk by Floyd Weston, we're not looking for what's popular, we're looking for what's true. Big difference. Ever hear the old saying, "what's popular isn't always right, and what's right isn't always popular"? That's exactly what this is. Of course we'd love it if more people would open their hearts and join the church and feel of God's great love for us, but if they don't, that's between them and God. He determines what's right and true, not the people who are popular in the eyes of the world.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:25 p.m.

    I am not Robin in Gotham. I am still using my real name.
    I want to know though, have these people at least stated that they feel that the attack ad against the church that portrayed missionaries as home invaders and ransackers was a piece of unjustified bigotry, or are they among those who claim that to portray missionaries as home ransackers is a representation of the truth?

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 23, 2008 9:08 p.m.

    The link from the Front Page is broken! Somebody fix it!

  • Re: Hendrix
    Dec. 23, 2008 9:00 p.m.

    Wait a minute! We were told by the ilk of you that "gay rights" activist like you are not attacking religion! And now you admit that you really want to defeat religion! Now we can all agree this is really about freedom of religion after all! Something some of us have always known.

  • Hendrix
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:35 p.m.

    Ted and Steve will be legal. These are great times when fables of adam and eve will be crushed as well as religion in general. Wake up folks, Ted and Steve are here to stay, adam and eve are a fable of the past. Viva .......

  • Robin in Gotham
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:16 p.m.

    Holy marginalization GLBTs!!

    I am sure that petitioning a minor religion is not a matter of forethought and planning. I am sure that this has nothing to do with marginalizing ads against only LDS in CA voting for their definition of institutional marriage along with the other 95% of religious institutions.

    Right? Riight.

  • Ward Project
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:00 p.m.

    The Church should turn the letters over to the wards and volunteers could answer each letter by enclosing a copy of the Proclamation on the Family and mail it back to the senders.

  • Robin in Gotham
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:51 p.m.

    Holy marginalization Gay Man!!!

    Gosh, I hope capaign this hard with all the other 95% of Christians, Jews and Muslims that voted to define marriage as one man and one woman. I am sure this was just a mild oversight that no other church was petitioned to come to your aide.

    Wow, this can't be more marginalization like your incidiary commercials against the LDS in CA for supporting their definition of institutional marriage.

    Golly, Gay Man, tell this is not more of the same!

    Right? Riiight.

  • Anon
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:45 p.m.

    As strongly as you believe about YOUR relgion, that's EXACTLY what others believe about THEIR religions. Muslims believe their clerics are God's "mouth piece". Catholics believe the Pope is also his "mouth piece". They, along with many others, believe their religions are "established by God". The difference? There are BILLIONS of adherents, whereas Mormons represent less than 0.01% of the Earth's population. Don't be so darn ignorant!

    I guess the small numbers would be in our favor then.

    Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

    Mat 7:14

  • Tell it to the voters
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:15 p.m.

    Albemar said:

    Good news... it's not going away. It's only begun. Much of America has had enough and we are not going to take it anymore. So until all families & individuals have their equal rights, that you take for granted, we will be back over and over again. Want this to go away? Then grant us our equal rights that you have.

    Thirty States have passed laws supporting traditional marriage, California and Arizona being the latest. If gay marriage is inevitable, I guess someone should have told the voters. If judges try to undo what these voters passed these same voters can pressure their State legislators to compel congress to convene a constitutional convention to draft an amendment to the U.S, constitution to protect traditional marriage. Then the States can vote again for one more time to settle this.

  • Bev
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:03 p.m.

    Re Galena.
    It's amazing when the LDS peoples true feelings are expressed on a posting blog.You can never trust your local fellow ward member. He/She may be one of them. Doesn't surprise me in the least. The church is filled with hypocrites.

  • Galena
    Dec. 23, 2008 5:41 p.m.

    I hate these boards but just have to read the hatred on both sides. I cannot believe you LDS are posting like this. The Church is divided and may ward is on a thin string when members choose to speak with hatred. Stop in one and all. You are destroying the Church and those who attack are detroying credibility. Stop it both of you or you will destroy the effort shic are closest to you hearts.

    Brothers and Sisters you have done enough damage to the Church. Stop it!

  • Dan M
    Dec. 23, 2008 5:32 p.m.

    In addition to what Frank said at 4:11 when the church issued Declaration 2 on the priesthood it was long after the pressure they were receiving from the civil rights movement had died away. If they really were just giving into the pressure they would have allowed it much earlier than june of 1978

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:58 p.m.

    The only thing the LDS church had invested in prop8 was solidifying marriage as between a man and a woman.

    LDS church has not said anything specific in reguards to civil unions so there's your loophole.
    While the church may not do anything to stop civil unions.
    Don't expect the LDS leadership to promote civil unions.

  • Frankly speaking
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:31 p.m.

    To the individual who responded to Mark:

    I don't believe that gays want to married in LDS temples. I do believe that they want to control the indoctrination of children in our public schools and punish companies owned by religionists and religions via anti-discrimination laws.

  • re Mark
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:25 p.m.

    I don't think you have to worry. When's the last time you saw Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Atheists or even inactive LDS members being married in the Temple? Your assumptions are simply wrong--it never will happen, legal gay marriage or not.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:23 p.m.

    To the 4:05 commentator,
    No constitutional admendment has been passed banning any sexual acts.
    The deabte was about what the government would recognize, not about what would be counted as criminal.

  • John Pack Lamber
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:17 p.m.

    To zzman,
    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints never opposed the Civil Rights movement. In fact the First Presidency issued a statement in support of the Civil Rights Act.

  • to Mark
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:16 p.m.

    "Can you ever imagine the "Gay Mormon Community" ever stepping foot into a Temple and being sealed for all time and eternity.

    That is exactly what would happen next if same sex marriage were to pass. No question in my mind."

    You do realize that there has been gay marriage in Massachusetts for a few years? No one is asking to be married in the Boston Temple.

    No one has asked to be married in the Calgary temple either and Canada also has gay marriage.

    Aren't you just a little paranoid?

  • Frank
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:11 p.m.

    Re: Mary Denying certain people the priesthood and then later giving it to them is something thats been happening since the old testament. So while I wouldnt call it church doctrine it is definitly a priesthood pattern repeated several times in history.

    Re: Mark They could make gay marriage More legal than marriage and people still couldnt force their way into a temple marriage. Law has no jurisdiction over religious rite that doesnt impose or violate human rights.

    Dec. 23, 2008 4:05 p.m.

    If all sexual acts of any nature were banned by constitutional amendment then the problem of gays versus heteros would just disappear. Babies could be conceived in science labs and raised by the state. There would be no need for sex anymore and no need for attacking each other. I think Reverends Jesse Jackson, Jimmy Swaggert and Jim Bakker would all agree, sex only gets us into trouble.

  • Chris
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:03 p.m.

    What makes me sad about all of this is the cruelty and hatred that litters these message boards. I am active LDS, but these comments about LGBT people make me feel like a bunch of Pharisees dragging an adulterous woman before the Master asking him if we should stone her.

    Joe and Jim, you're welcome to sit with me and my family on Sunday.

  • Hate?
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:54 p.m.

    These boards are friggin' Pollyanna compared to what GLBT forums have to say.

  • Won't Matter
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:46 p.m.

    27,000 pro-gay letters to Church headquarters?

    It won't do them a bit of good.

    The LDS church gets its direction from the Lord and only from the Lord. And the Lord will never, NEVER sanction homosexual actions of any kind.

    Homosexuals: love the sinner, hate the sin.

    The caravan moves on....

  • Mary
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:45 p.m.

    Re: this comment yesterday - "The Church's actions are based on its doctrine, not on public opinion."
    Rather like the church finally opening their eyes in June, 1978 when African-American males were "given
    the priesthood" ??

  • Mark
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:45 p.m.

    Can you ever imagine the "Gay Mormon Community" ever stepping foot into a Temple and being sealed for all time and eternity.

    That is exactly what would happen next if same sex marriage were to pass. No question in my mind.

    How insane would that be.

    Relax, of course no prophet of God would ever allow it.

  • To "one human family"@3:02
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:21 p.m.

    Hm... well, yes, some of the human race ARE evil and wicked--but who's qualified to judge and/or sift out the bad ones and "send them packing" (whatever you mean by that)? Christians are commanded not to judge, lest we be judged. And even in the JST, since that means something to most of us, we're told that Jesus taught not to judge UNRIGHTEOUSLY. I'd assume that STILL precludes rash and cruel judgment.

    GOD is our judge. Let's let HIM keep the job. When we humans take judgment into our own hands, especially deciding who deserves to be cruelly punished, much less live or die, horrible things tend to happen--like Abu Ghraib, My Lai, the Holocaust, and yes, even Mountain Meadows.

    So can we LDS people stop the finger-pointing at other people and take a good, hard look into our own hearts, please? And watch the rhetoric spewing out of our own mouths? Some of it's much too venomous to be representative of true disciples of Christ.

  • Cali Coug
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:18 p.m.

    Good to know you won't post anything again.

  • Stupid People
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:11 p.m.

    This is my first time posting/reading comments. You all are a bunch of self-absorbed morons. You post comments without your real name, you say anything to get a reaction, you check back to see poeple's response. Is this what you do all day long? None of you are doing God's work, none of you will get a point across. It's all a power trip in your head. This is so lame. This will be the first and last comment I ever read/post. LOSERS!

  • DC Morris
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:10 p.m.

    Timothy Chapter 3

    1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
    2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
    3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
    4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

  • Arthur
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:09 p.m.

    Its funny. All of a sudden I just got a peek into the past of Judas thinking "People think that he's flawless and forget that he is just human like the rest of us."

  • re: one human family
    Dec. 23, 2008 3:02 p.m.

    However, some are evil and wicked. We need to sift out the bad ones and send them packing.

  • re: Anonymous 1:53p.m.
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:44 p.m.

    "I remind all people that this is not a church created by man, but that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is established by God and led by a living prophet. Let us follow God's word as given by the prophet, His mouth-piece."

    As strongly as you believe about YOUR relgion, that's EXACTLY what others believe about THEIR religions. Muslims believe their clerics are God's "mouth piece". Catholics believe the Pope is also his "mouth piece". They, along with many others, believe their religions are "established by God". The difference? There are BILLIONS of adherents, whereas Mormons represent less than 0.01% of the Earth's population. Don't be so darn ignorant!

  • @ Not about equal rights
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:42 p.m.

    "don't be fooled - this is not about equal anything. Gays want certain things - marriage and children and they will stop at nothing until they are granted those two things."

    You do realize that in California, gay adopt children all the time. They do not have to be married. It is actually against the law to discriminate against gays who want to adopt. If you thought Prop 8 was about adoption, you were mislead. It has nothing to do with adoption.

    Gay are raising children, even here in Utah, without the blessings of marriage.

  • One Human Family
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:32 p.m.

    What a bunch of hateful people on this board. If anyone ever wanted to scare aware prospective LDS converts, this would be the place to bring them.

    To anyone that is gay that is reading this, please know that not all Mormons are so ignorant and hateful. Many members of the church think the church leaders are flawless and forget that they are human just like the rest of us.

  • Dean
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:30 p.m.

    Isn't it interesting that those who either don't believe in Jesus Christ as our Savior, or don't bother following His teachings, are always lecturing the rest of us on the proper way to follow Him?

  • Re: AMB
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:28 p.m.

    Apparently, you didn't notice that your last sentence is completely inconsistent with your first sentence.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:22 p.m.

    To Chance,
    The Church says they do not oppose certain rights. That is a lot different than supporting rights. Until people can understand nuances instead of only extremes, there will be anger and hate and vitriol.
    The Church does not take political stands, and in its view this is a political issue and they will not become involved.

  • GoManUReds
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:21 p.m.

    The most interesting comment I read on this board reads "So they can have influence in politics when we tell them they can?" Isn't that the truth?! The gay community wants to take away the Church's tax exemption...unless they help the gay community in the political arena!
    It's obvious that what you really want are special rights, not equal rights.
    It's inevitable that gays will marry ("legally") someday. What isn't inevitable is that we all back down to their ridiculous demands.
    I'm proud to be a member of an organization which will not back down to outside pressures.

  • zzman
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:20 p.m.

    Shame on the LDS Church for not supporting equality and freedom. Oh, but it's the same organization that opposed the Civil Rights and Women's Rights movements a generation ago. At least they are consistent in their opposition to anything undermining the patriarchal order!

  • What a wonderful
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:14 p.m.

    world we live in. Animals such as Lions and tigers and bears can co exist with The Human Animals. It is to bad the Human Animals are so caught up in the carnal world.

    I guess that is why so many are marking their territory. And now they want rights also as if they were the Majority.

    Get a Life.

  • RE: Bill Williamson | 10:29 a.m.
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:10 p.m.

    Bill, thanks for an astute analysis and objective assessment of the situation. I'm active LDS and agree 100%. There was already something of an US vs. THEM mentality before Prop. 8; the protests simply galvanized it.

    Exactly right: It was VERY self-defeating of the protesters to attack religion and employ the very sort of hate speech many GLBT activists have long bemoaned. As a direct result, a lot of otherwise open-minded Mormons have dug in their heels and cast aside whatever sympathy they had before. I certainly wish many of them were still kinder and more compassionate about what they're saying now, but people being people...

    Thanks for the support! May cooler heads and kinder words and actions always prevail.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 23, 2008 2:12 p.m.

    To the 10:06 commentator,
    Prop 8 does not require anyone to follow Church doctrine. It provides no penalties in any way for same-gender sexual relations, so to claim it forces people is misguided. There is a big difference between the government not proactively encoraging something and something being illegal.

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 23, 2008 1:53 p.m.

    The watchman is on the tower, his name is President Thomas S. Monson. He is put on the watchtower by God. I remind all people that this is not a church created by man, but that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is established by God and led by a living prophet. Let us follow God's word as given by the prophet, His mouth-piece. The words spoken by President Monson are God's words for the whole entire world, members and non-members alike.
    So the church's stance on gay marriage is God's stance. Plain and simple. Merry Christmas everybody.

  • Counselor
    Dec. 23, 2008 1:38 p.m.

    I would suggest the LGBT community take a lesson from the Protestant Reformation and the FLDS. The Protestants disagreed with the doctrines of the Catholic Church and they separated themselves from the church. They set up their own church with the doctrines they could believe. Then they could have the spiritual marrages like the FLDS and then they could live "happily ever after".

  • Cats
    Dec. 23, 2008 1:14 p.m.

    This is clearly just a publicity stunt. The pro-gay marriage movement knows that the LDS Church will not and cannot change it's position.

    This whole thing reminds me of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment in the 70s and 80s. The Church was warned then that it was making a "grave" mistake by opposing it and it would suffer the consequences. Well, the ERA went down in flames. The Church, on the other hand, has since acquired millions more members, many temples and has missionaries all over the world.

    The Church will not be intimidated. The Church will always do the right thing and will continue to grow and prosper.

  • nice try gays
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:52 p.m.

    nice try gays with the hand delivered letters but the honest truth is I understand now that even more states are pushing for marriage protection laws for the 2010 election. People across the nation witnessed first hand what the gay movement is really all about with their threatening, ugly response to prop 8's passage and people realize they too need protection against these militant nut cases.

  • Christian
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:40 p.m.

    The beginning of the article reads:

    "Gay-rights activists hand-delivered more than 27,000 letters to the LDS Church's downtown Salt Lake headquarters Monday in the latest effort to earn the church's support in the fight for equal rights."

    One would think one could count on the Deseret News to write an objective article about this. The Church does support equal rights. It doesn't support the destruction of our civilization.

  • Jordan
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:43 p.m.

    shocking how many people claim to be such strong members of a church of pple that" love one another"...yet here we all are judging gays and lesbians because we don't live the same way. I have split opinions on this whole marriage and religion and legal situation. But this whole acting all high and mighty is becoming real OLD! Honestly, people are people..So treat them with respect. I don't care if your pro equal rights or against it.

  • defacing temples didn't work
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:42 p.m.

    defacing the LA LDS Temple , threatening the poor elderly folks in the temple with white powder as well as a host of other outrageous and unacceptable behavior backfired nation wide for the militant gay movement so now they try another approach - pacification and propaganda. Well, that won't work either. The LDS Church as well as all of the other folks who supported prop 8 are well aware of what is at stake in protecting marriage, children and the family and they aren't about to jump on any gay-rights band wagon. Honestly, society MUST be protected against gays and I see no reason why an employer shouldn't be able to protect his/her workforce against the destructive nature of homosexuality.

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:30 p.m.

    I love being persecuted for standing up for God's laws, then being asked by the persecutors for support. Where are our equal rights? RESPECT is earned, not given.

  • HA - another trick from gays
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:30 p.m.

    The militant gay movement is always on the go. They are constantly trying to break into society in ways that society has been wise enough to protect. So gays can't beat the church so the next move is to try and pacify the leadership a little here and a little there until they finally swing public opinion in their favor. A word to GAYS - after the despicable way your leadership responded after the passage of prop 8 - most people are even MORE determined than ever before to restrict gays in every way possible.

  • Not about equal rights ....
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:20 p.m.

    don't be fooled - this is not about equal anything. Gays want certain things - marriage and children and they will stop at nothing until they are granted those two things. Gays, like other mentally ill people in our society, are RESTRICTED from having certain rights for good reason - to protect children as well as the foundation of society - the family unit. The LDS Church is wise enough to know when the fox is circling the hen house and is not about to give an inch toward softening it's position on morality. Heck after this years election I think everyone is even MORE determined to restrict gays from having certain rights.

  • California Girl
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:18 p.m.

    As far as I am concerned the homosexual community lost any of my support when they intollerantly attacked the church. They speak of love and tollerance, none of which they have shown in the past month. The people of California have spoken. I feel if the election were held today Yes on 8 would win by an even larger percentage. They have damaged their cause.

  • Southerner
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:09 p.m.

    What a waste of paper!

  • SLC Resident
    Dec. 23, 2008 11:56 a.m.

    Unfortunately, I believe the zeal with which the Church pursued Prop 8 may have backfired, and they are now more well known for anti gay stances than for clean living and large families. Regardless of which side you're on, be careful not to be too overzealous, sometimes even when you win, you end up losing.

  • RE: Eric Larson
    Dec. 23, 2008 11:56 a.m.

    I agree. In this situation, I could see the church not opposing, but definitely not actively supporting such measures.

  • I don't get it
    Dec. 23, 2008 11:41 a.m.

    As an active LDS member, I am shocked by some of the comments by LDS people on here. I do not see how allowing domestic partnership effects me at all. How does it effect me? I believe that marriage should be between a man an a women and I believe that homosexual relations is a sin, but come on. Every Gay person I have meet, I've liked. They are charitable, loving, kind and good people. I know they are not perfect, but neither am I and neither are you. We don't raise income tax on people because they are addicted to pornography, and don't say to people who drink alcohol they can't adopt children. I do not get it. Sorry, my LDS brother and sisters, I don't get it. What if your child was gay and had a partner? Would you really think it is OK that they you child is taxed higher, that your child can't adopt a child through a state adoption. Honestly, Shame on you.

  • JB
    Dec. 23, 2008 11:31 a.m.

    There are a few negative posts here by Mormons but most are civil. I'm afraid that the reason they come across as hateful is because they refuse to condone the gay lifestyle and that is seen as hateful. Most do not attack gays personally. In reverse, many gay supporters personally attack the posters by judging them to be hateful and prejudice.

    When someone makes a respectful comment and says they love gay people but disagrees with the lifestyle, that is not hate and anyone judging it to be so is out of line. Why do we not have a right to an opinion? Why will many gay activists only accept us if we agree with their position? What happened to the first amendment?

  • 27,000 Letters??
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:59 a.m.

    Somewhere in the world, there are 20 gay activists with really bad writer's cramp.

  • Alter Boy
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:57 a.m.

    The church isn't about to go out and promote what the LGBT lobby considers "rights". But I can see that if the voice of the people approve such a measure, they won't oppose it. Big diffence.

    And the LGBT lobby isn't really asking for the church's help. They misunderstand the above. When the church said they weren't opposed to the benefits that California provides for domestic partners, they saw it as a chance to embarrass the church if they wouldn't actively promote such rights in Utah.

    Again, I believe the key to this is that if the voice of the people have voted for such rights, the church won't oppose to them. Where the community standards do not support these things, the church won't actively campaign for them. And getting the voice of the people to vote for these "rights" in Utah will be a very hard sell.

  • Town Heathan
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:49 a.m.

    Thank you all you LDS members on here who show sooooo much love for people that are different from you. You remind me daily why I quit your church.

    Read your emails....they are filled with hatred, scorn and are down mean.

    Your example shows the hollowness of your preaching.

  • Bill Williamson
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:29 a.m.

    I'm for gay marriage, but after the reaction to prop 8 we should just leave the Mormon church alone.

    After prop 8 passed most of the protests didn't focus on getting equal rights for the GLBT community, but on releasing anger and frustration about the passage of prop 8, and the Mormon church was the punching bag. Some will argue that it was just the actions of the few, and the entire GLBT community shouldn't be judged on this basis. But where was the gay communities condemnation of these actions?

    Although some Mormons have broken with the church, I don't think it is likely to happen anymore. Why would they after protesters mocked their beliefs, and insulted their church? These comment boards are a great example, Mormons haven't changed their minds they only have became more stubborn, because the protests created a US vs THEM mentality.

    The protesters poisoned national sentiment against the Mormon church, and now they want them to help? So they can have influence in politics when we tell them they can?

  • Track Record
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:23 a.m.

    Since the Mormon Church does not have that great of a track record, they will eventually give in to the GLBT just like they did when Polygamy was stopping them from obtaining Statehood. Jesus taught us to love one another. What everyone seems to forget is what type of love that actually is. I doubt that the Mormons or the GLBT will ever reach a common ground in understanding each others view, but the letters will attempt to help bridge the gap.

  • Facts
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:18 a.m.

    I believe the reason why the Gay communitee sought to influence the LDS church in favor of gaining some protections is simply due to a realization of reality. Most legislators in Utah are Mormon and the Mormon church "influences" their thinking. Since the church has said it is not "anti gay", these people are acting sincerely in asking for the church's help.

    BTW, did any of you see the National Geographic Program Sunday night on identical twins? Had an interesting section on gayness in identical twins. The "cause" may be due, as I have said, to a hormonal imbalance in the mother (each twin does NOT receive equal nutritional support in-utero, it turns out...). Anyway, we will all be changing our views on homosexuality over the next generation, so I have to carefully point stuff out, and try not to make people angry...

    BTW, I am not gay and I am LDS (married, kids, etc.).

  • to mormon 6:18
    Dec. 23, 2008 10:07 a.m.

    great post,the hate on most posts here is pathetic.not very christlike.nothing but hate,hate,hate,if your gay,hate,if you have diff. skin color,hate,if your liberal hate,in some cases I've had mormons turn cold and distant when they found out I was not mormon.Hate.

  • CTMac
    Dec. 23, 2008 9:46 a.m.

    I wish the church rep would have taken a match to the letters and said "this is for vandalizing our temples and meeting houses".

    The GLBT or whatever they like to be called just lost any sympathy from me when they started vandalizing churches.

  • Chance
    Dec. 23, 2008 8:28 a.m.

    People, I am LDS. Dont want anyone to think I am Gay here...I have to say, dont build yourself up to high on this. The Church says that they support certain rights under the law for GLBT's. This might seem to some as if they are giving a little. Some think that they will not concede one tiny hair.....not necessarily true. There are certain lines that I believe we will not cross, but the Church may decide to leave it alone completely, allowing it to proceed based on the public vote. Some might see this as God's church giving in to the demands of the Devil. Just be prepared that they may not take the stand that you expect them to. Then again, they may... It is up to the Lord. He allows the adversary to make gains. Almost as if he abides by rules of engagement. Hold true, he will conquer eventually.

  • Albemar
    Dec. 23, 2008 8:24 a.m.

    This is wonderful news! When are you folks going to get it, we don't want anything to do with your church. Likewise we don't want you to have anything to do with our families. It's the LDS Church's constant meddling into government rights of American citizens that is so offensive.

    Good news... it's not going away. It's only begun. Much of America has had enough and we are not going to take it anymore. So until all families & individuals have their equal rights, that you take for granted, we will be back over and over again. Want this to go away? Then grant us our equal rights that you have.

    Oh, every day the LDS Church does not respond, makes it look more and more like a political opportunist and a liar.

  • to Jon 6:18
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:49 a.m.

    You should reaalu think why the Church (and all other churches) are trying to keep the "Marriage" as is -Man and Women- if you are "active" and have your "own" (not from your parents) testimony, you wouldnt say "I dont share the same opinion with the church". This is not about being homophobic, is about that if we change the most basic organization of the society, everything will change...and not for good.
    We can have same "civil" priviledges but not "religion marriages" because under GOD'S LAW there is not change. HE doesnt change because things are a little bit different in the 21st century, HE DOESNT CHANGE.

  • To standards change | 1:05
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:35 a.m.

    Gays and lesbians can already be married in our temples. Our doctrine is clear.

    Like anyone else, if gays and lesbians submit their will to God's and obey His commandments, they are worthy to marry according to God's plan in His temple. Man to woman.

    And, if they continue to live in accordance with God's will, they can, just like the rest of us, look forward to the day -- in this world or the next -- when the Atonement will make all things right and they will be created new creatures, no longer afflicted by same-sex temptations.

    That standards has never changed.

  • Midwest Member
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:33 a.m.

    I wish that more of my LDS member peers would listen to ALL of the First Presidency's counsel -- "The Churchs opposition to same-sex marriage neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility towards homosexual men and women. Protecting marriage between a man and a woman does not affect Church members Christian obligations of love, kindness and humanity toward all people."

    The Church admonishes us to "approach this issue with respect for others, understanding, honesty, and civility."

    The comments that I continue to read on this issue make me wonder how much of the contention is due to the hateful attitudes of LDS "faithful" who do not take the time to keep the second "greatest" commandment "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."

    Our family's goal for 2009 is to actively reach out, in love and understanding to those who deal with the challenge of same gender attraction. To help them know that there is a place for them at the table in the LDS Church. Same gender attraction is NOT a sin. Cruelty or indifference to those who suffer IS!

  • Svoboda
    Dec. 23, 2008 7:29 a.m.

    Special rights for those who do that which is unnatural? What next?

    Hey, I REALLY, REALLY love my ferret Rocky. Rocky and me are going to Boston and get hitched.

    Ahhhh, true love, Rocky and me.

  • wow
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:59 a.m.

    As an LDS member living very far away from Utah, let me offer a slightly different point of view. I have felt it necessary to go into the Mormon closet (i.e., not talking about being Mormon). The whole Prop 8 business has poisoned the atmosphere across the country. I no longer feel comfortable talking to people about the church, because the first thing they want to ask about is Prop 8. And second is the FLDS Texas thing. With our strange history of marriage, I find it hard to fight back against either item without seeming to be a hypocrite. My whole family has been impacted.
    This is a stunt, but if the church is willing to back legislation which it claims to support, then everyone wins.

  • Elder Martin
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:16 a.m.

    I think the Church should maintain it's politcy neutrality on these issues, and avoid supporting any legislation, unless it directly affects the traditional definition of 'family' and 'marriage.'

    We Thank Thee, O God, for a prophet to guide us in these Latter-day days...

  • Carlos
    Dec. 23, 2008 6:06 a.m.

    Lots of tree products were used on this effort. I am sure there is an artist somewhere that will take them and turn them into a nice artsy work. Either that or a bonfire.

    God approves of relationships between married men and women. He has destroyed societies that manipulate these teachings. Please, let's not give him any more reasons to pull the rug out from under us because of wickedness.

    Let's go back to the basics. Thou shalt not commit adultery is the same whether it is with men or women.

  • Irchr
    Dec. 23, 2008 5:20 a.m.

    All you need to do, to see why the church and so many others don't support Gay anything, is just attend the GAY PRIDE PARADE in Down Town San Francisco. If this doesn't turn you against this "movement" then you are either gay or unconscious. We made a mistake and scheduled a visit to San Francisco during parade week end. I was afraid the streets were going to open and swallow up every thing in site. Decadent doesn't even begin to describe what was being done openly in the streets, AND THERE WAS CHILDREN THERE TOO. Sex activities in public, nudity, well I was much more accepting of gays until I was there. Now I have very little tolerance for the life style. I found nothing there to be PROUD of.

  • CJinNC
    Dec. 23, 2008 5:15 a.m.

    I believe the central issue is this- If marriage were to be redefined in the terms that the Gay / Lesbian rights activists demand Our church doctrine would then be in violation of Federal laws. Our church would be dragged through court after court, our leaders would be jailed, church property could be confiscated... sound familiar?

    Our doctrine also teaches that all men (and women) have been given their agency and freedom to chose in this life. While we believe that homosexuality is morally wrong and thwarts the plan of salvation by preventing the natural process of creating families, we do not believe that these brothers and sister should be treated as second class citizens because of their lifestyles.

    In the Church's statement they conclude, (after agreeing that such persons should have all the rights and protection of the law), "so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches." I think it should be clear where the church stands and what is at stake.

  • gassorp
    Dec. 23, 2008 4:35 a.m.

    Gassorp is a childish name given by one child to another who was tasting dirt!! In all the name calling back and forth where can we find the truth. It seems that early conditioning about sex and emotional factors of attraction set up a person to experiment with homosexual behavior...some children continue the behavior and find it pleasurable..and others do not..and find pleasure in heterosexual behavior. Inspired prophets declare in the Bible and in modern scripture what is sin. Those who want to follow the Prophet exercise faith to overcome same sex attraction and repent of homosexual behavior..With profession help from groups like Evergreen...these persons live happy moral lives. Be well..see Deuteronomy 5:29,33 and Isaiah 3:10

  • Happy Man
    Dec. 23, 2008 1:50 a.m.

    I wish they would deliver them to my house instead. They make great fire starter for my wood burning fireplace.

  • standards change
    Dec. 23, 2008 1:05 a.m.

    God's standards constantly change, which is why we need a Prophet. It is also why, within 100 years, gays and lesbians will be allowed to marry in the Temples.

  • Big Whoop!
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:11 a.m.

    Big Whoop! Let's see...sending all their complaints via E-mail would've garnered zero public attention. Also, just sending the letters via regular mail would garner the same. So, what's left? Oh, yes; yet another publicity stunt trying to make the Church out to be the Big Ol' Bad Man. And it's their target, not because of the Church's stance, but because it's not that big.

  • Dale
    Dec. 23, 2008 12:07 a.m.

    It behavior stupid.
    Why is everyone afraid to call it what it is. Its not about rights is about behavior. Our society is founded on the "Laws of God" (see first paragraph of the D of I.
    This behavior is contrary and should not be supported by individuals, business, governments or churches.

  • The Facts
    Dec. 22, 2008 11:13 p.m.

    Marraige is a civil institution not a civil right. The definition of the institution is a union between a man and a woman. The other side is fighting to change the definition of an institution by claiming it is a right.

  • Richard
    Dec. 22, 2008 10:49 p.m.

    I for one don't understand why members of the church oppose the churches stand on this issue. It's quite simple. Either you believe in a living prophet or you don't. This doctrine will never be changed. It is eternal. It would be nice if we could treat people the way our Savior does.

  • Great and spacious
    Dec. 22, 2008 10:42 p.m.

    All of the people in the great and spacious building are pointing their fingers at the LDS church. I guess we have to do what they say instead of doing what the Lord says. Why do the LDS members get trashed for standing up for their values, but when something is said about gay people it is not Christ like? Hmmmmmm!

  • Re: Mark
    Dec. 22, 2008 10:41 p.m.

    If the LDS church was successful in requiring all California citizens to follow our doctrine, there wouldn't be any homosexuals left in the state, nor would there be any Starbucks coffee houses, and Hollywood would not exist, among other things. The LDS church consists of 2% of the California population. They didn't require anybody to follow any doctrine, they just asked people to vote their conscience - and those people obliged. The only thing that homosexuals are not allowed to do in California is marry members of the same gender, the same as every other person in the state. They already have equal rights. People can still be any religion they like. Also, bear in mind that there were more than 100 different churches and organizations in league with the LDS church on this. If people were forced to live by LDS doctrine, they were also forced to live by those other doctrines.

  • Another realization should
    Dec. 22, 2008 10:20 p.m.

    be that WE will never change and we do not want to change and we don't consider ourselves "sinners." If you do you certainly have a right to your opinion and your church, but you should also keep out of our right to feel and be who we are. You are right...glad we're not in Singapore! And you should be glad as well. In many areas of the world you religious views would not be accepted. Learn to live and let live and leave people alone that don't feel as you do. When you do, we will do the same.

  • Mark
    Dec. 22, 2008 10:06 p.m.

    Dear all -

    The letters delivered were not an attempt to get the Church to change its doctrine. They were an attempt to get the Church to support (not lead) civil legislation extending protections to same sex couples. For those of you still confused, please reread the article.

    The Church was successful in requiring all California citizens to follow Church doctrine (prop 8), and it is understandable that some citizens would rather not be "Mormon" in that regard (whatever happened to the pro-free agency version of missionary work?). A peaceful response like this is understandable and should be lauded.

  • washcomom
    Dec. 22, 2008 10:02 p.m.

    Remember the old Aesop fable - where the Sun and the Cloud challenged each other to see who would get a man to take off his coat? The Cloud blew alot of cold wind at the man, to which he kept his coat on tighter. The sun brightened and warmed up the man, to which he took off his coat.

    There's alot of cold wind blowing out there regarding this issue, and it just doesn't do the job now, does it?

  • RE: Anonymous | 9:38 p.m.
    Dec. 22, 2008 9:56 p.m.

    Agreed 100%. Very well said. Too many posters on here who SEEM to be church members are taking WAY too harsh and strident a tone. PEOPLE--Just because we're "standing for something" gives us NO justification in being rude and unpleasant. We need to be kind and charitable in our words and actions--I can't remember a time when it's ever been more important.

    Support the sanctity of marriage and the traditional family--AND stop the harshness and judgment in the words we use. We need to do BOTH. You who are using that mean-spirited rhetoric are embarrassing yourselves, the rest of us, and I'd venture to guess the Lord and Savior Himself.

    Love the sinner, speak against the sin, and remember kindness and charity. Let's hope that's not too much to ask!

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 22, 2008 9:38 p.m.

    Everyone, just remember not to hate. Its not our position to be mean and spiteful towards those who have chosen immoral conduct, but to uphold that which is right and good as those who have supported proposition 8.

    It bothers me as a member of the church to read the comments by those members who obviously have a hatred toward those who are gay.

    I vehemently disagree with this conduct and the very notion the choice to practice homesexuality entitles them to the right to marry, but we need to avoid allowing hate to seep into our opposition. Remember how the savior dealt with those who were living in sin...and we're all living in sin, whether we like it or not.

  • Never Change
    Dec. 22, 2008 9:28 p.m.

    We believe the church laws to be eternal. This means nothing will ever change. The LDS can NEVER change their policies on homosexual ideas. It simply won't happen. Love thy neighbor but don't bend eternal laws.

    Dec. 22, 2008 9:29 p.m.

    As a gay, active member of the church, it saddens me that my fellow church members have so much bitterness and hate towards certain issues or ideas without "seeking to understand."

    I for one, as a gay man believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but because of the way both sides handled themselves on prop 8 i would have voted no.

    I would encourage members to learn, and understand with an open heart where people come from.
    I don't expect them to agree or be supportive but just be mindful of others opinions.

    I would hope that all people regardless of sex, gender, etc... would have basic rights given to them and granted to them.

    Keep it simple, look at the basic rights and in the future we can tackle the bigger issues that face gays and those who may not agree with them.

  • Standard of Truth
    Dec. 22, 2008 9:08 p.m.

    "The Standard of Truth has been erected. No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing..." Go read the rest of that passage and see if you think a mere 27,000 letters is going to change the doctrine. 27 trillion letters dropped at church headquarters isn't going to change that doctrine.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 22, 2008 9:04 p.m.

    To the 6:42 commentator,
    Matthew 19:4-6 clearly teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman.

  • Welk
    Dec. 22, 2008 8:54 p.m.

    Any person who feels that the protests in California were "statistically small number of unfortunate incidents" has never been caught in the streets of San Francisco during one of the many protests (whether or not they were for the benefit of the gay community). They are as scary as anything I have ever seen, as well as destructive and anything but helpful to the gay movement.

    "Lived through gay protests."

  • John Pack Lambert
    Dec. 22, 2008 8:40 p.m.

    I think Eric Larsen is 100% correct. I do not think he could be more accurate in his assesment.
    I think it is also hypocritical for there to be claims that the Church is too involved in politics connected with this push to get the church involved in politics.

  • Don't fall for it...
    Dec. 22, 2008 8:38 p.m.

    The gay community doesn't want equal rights, they want validation from society. They want their relationship to have the same respect in society as true marriage. But that won't be enough. Once they have gay marriage, the next step is to persecute those who might speak out against it through hate speech laws.

    The LDS Church should not be a pawn in their game.

  • Lynn
    Dec. 22, 2008 8:35 p.m.

    Why do so many people keep asking where did Jesus, in the Bible, condemn homosexuality? His apostles did, and they got their authority from him, just as our prophets and apostles get their authority from him. Prophets and apostles speak for Jesus, as if He himself were speaking. There are several places in the New Testament where homosexuality is condemned by the apostles, and thus by Jesus. His Apostle Paul was especially forthright about condemning it. Read Romans 1:24-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:8-10, for just a few examples in the Bible.

    People need to really read the Bible, before they start thinking Jesus will accept their gay lifestyle. Jesus will never accept immorality. He came to save sinners, that's true, but only if they are willing to repent, forsake their sinful ways, and follow him, which means keep his commandments.

    Those who are demanding gay marriage, who are asking society and the church to accept and condone their sin, are not repentant. They are not following Jesus. How can they call themselves Christian?

  • To AMB | 7:53
    Dec. 22, 2008 8:13 p.m.

    There's nothing wrong with being gay? I have your word on that?

    I'm so relieved! Here I've been believing all along what the Bible says.

    I'm so embarrassed! Thanks for setting me straight!

  • awsomeron
    Dec. 22, 2008 8:03 p.m.

    Doctrine Does Change With Revelation. Declaration I and II prove that. However I would Not bet on a change on this one any time soon.

    The Church States In Proclamation For The Family, "That Marriage Is Between A Man and a Women"

    As Al Gore would say the Discussion Is Over.

    I do not see where Gay Marriage has anything to do with Equal Rights.

    Equal Rights is about being able to Sleep, Eat, Buy A Home, Be Employed, Get an Education, Get Promoted, and a few other things, weather you are male, female, or what ever Race you might be.

    There where some Laws against Interracial Marriage but those where struck down many years ago.

    Equal Rights is about Women Voting, Title 9, and No Child Left Behind.

    Homosexuals have equal rights under the law and at last check do very well in the education and job market. As a States Rights Issue most States have voted against Gay Marriage, some by very wide margins. We should be allowed to have the same luck with Abortion.

    You are free in this Country to play house with who ever you want, what you do is your business, but not Marriage.

  • Don't Get IT
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:53 p.m.

    Hmmm....Weren't these the same people that said Church's should stay out of politics? What are they trying to accomplish? The Doctrines of the Church will not change toward marriage or homosexual behavior no matter how many letters HQ receives.
    Here in So Cal things have been fairly quiet as late RE: Prop8. It seems to me that this attempt of swamping Church HQ with mail is an attempt to get the Church to support a political matter. Isn't that called Hypocrisy?

  • AMB
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:53 p.m.

    There is nothing wrong with being gay.
    Gay Rights= Civil Rights
    Being gay isn't usually a choice. Religion is.
    Church and state are separate in our government to protect both entities.
    Instead of denying other people their rights, maybe we should concentrate on living our own lives with integrity and compassion-----it seems a lot more Christ-like.

  • RE: sarah jane | 5:52 p.m.
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:47 p.m.

    Sarah, the reason "these people" have "the nerve" to come asking the Church this favor is that--let's try this again, for at least the 100th time--THEY'RE NOT (NECESSARILY) THE SAME GROUP OF PEOPLE. The activists who threw the royal hissy-fit were GLBT, sure, but that's the primary thing they have in common with this group. They share a common interest, but their tactics are much different.

    Let's be fair, even if the protesters weren't.

  • Re: wow!!
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:43 p.m.

    ME TOO!

  • wow!!
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:32 p.m.

    This is pretty interesting. I am a member of the church and I was completely in favor of Prop. 8, and I was thrilled that the church did everything that it did to help get the vote out on Prop. 8. On that note, the church somewhat stated what there official stance is when it comes to gay rights. They said several times that they aren't against civil unions and equal rights for gays. So now I hope the church leaders live up to what they said. I hope the church continues to fight to protect traditional marriage.

  • OR....
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:32 p.m.

    ...we just don't want to waste our time with ignorant people like yourselves...hmmmm.

  • What don't you understand?
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:23 p.m.

    You didn't like our lifestyle so you got a Proposition passed! You constributed approximately 70% of the funds to do so and it's our right to express our feelings just like you expressed yours. You know this will be turned around and you don't want to face it.

  • RT2
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:18 p.m.

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is led and guided by the Almighty God in heaven, He who gives and takes life. If the HCR wants the LDS church to change, start praying to that same Almighty God.

  • Oh goodness
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:14 p.m.

    It's interesting that many people don't understand why they are "singling out" the LDS people. Actually, if you did your research, you would find they are not. They have also picketed at other places and other churches. And what's so hard to understand? Don't you know that members of the LDS church gave approx 70% of the money towards Prop 8? You probably didn't know that because religious people often don't like to face the truth. And to the all the people that keep quoting the Bible as a reason to be against gay people...give us a break! How many of the practices do you still practice from the Bible? Do you own slaves, treat women as second class citizens;...the list goes on and on. We don't believe the Bible is still relevant (in most ways) for today!

  • Re: Re: Dear WWJD
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:09 p.m.

    Jesus did speak out about incest. Read Matthew 18:6. "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

    Be careful when making ignorant comments about what Jesus said. Read your Bible and Book of Mormon and the rest of the standard works to find Jesus' words.

    For more reference, you can find a repeat of those words in Mark 9:42 or Luke 17:2.

    USA has already made laws which prohibit incest. Just FYI, Paul spoke out about homosexuality in Romans chapter 1.

  • Try Singapore
    Dec. 22, 2008 7:04 p.m.

    Many "pro-gay" people and also some "chrisitan superior" people have left comments on "no love being spread, stop hating, stop judging and assuming, etc."

    Here is my stance: love gays as children of our Heavenly Father, but call them to repentance.

    In Singapore, homosexuality is not just a sin, its illegal, punishable with jail time! How would the gay and lesbian community act if the USA adopted similar laws?? All these gays and lesbian "activists" would have to hide their actions, otherwise suffering legal consequences.

    Luckily for them, this is the USA, not Singapore, and they are not punished by law. Still, we should treat gays and lesbians as Jesus did: love them, but condemn their sin and call them to repentance.

    Anyone argue with that?

  • Hmmm
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:56 p.m.

    What I'm wondering is why so many of the GLBT emails didn't get through the email filter? Must've been some preeeeeetty nasty emails.

  • Re: Movie quote
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:55 p.m.

    Little Women!

  • Re: Dear WWJD
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:54 p.m.

    Jesus never spoke about incest, either, so he must be for it?

  • The Rock
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:44 p.m.

    This nonsense is the direct result of the Supreme Court striking down anti-sodomy laws.

    If sodomy were illegal these guys would have to choose between the closet and the jail cell.

    Gays have a perverted sense of right and wrong and they get angry when we don't share in their beliefs.

    They have a right to believe what they want.
    The rest of us have a right to believe what we want.

    We both have a right to vote our conscience at the ballot box.

    Prop 8 won in California. Get over it.

  • Dear WWJD
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:42 p.m.

    Please show us WHERE in the Bible, Jesus spoke about homosexuality.

    We'll just wait here, while you look it up.

    Remember: Jesus.

  • Tom in CA
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:35 p.m.

    Re: RE: RE: Anonymous


    Good job anonymous.

  • absolutely silly
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:32 p.m.

    It's just another stinking ploy to get news coverage. They don't actually want the LDS church to back them. It's bullying, bogging down with frivilous time consuming, mind numbing nonsense, and frankly, if people weren't sick of reading/hearing about it before, they are now!

  • Oh brother!
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:26 p.m.

    I don't have to major in English to know that there is a large distinguishing difference between "not objecting" and "actively promoting".

    I'm really sick of this topic.

  • Dry Bachelor
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:24 p.m.

    The letter mongers are trying to "take the Church at it's word" from the following paragraph from The Divine Insitution of Marriage: "The Church does not object to rights (already established in California) regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the family or the constitutional rights of churches and their adherents to administer and practice their religion free from government interference."
    However, the part they are leaving out is "already established in California." The LDS Church did not say they would assist in any other pro-gay legislation. The letter mongers are deluding themselves. I hope they enjoyed licking the stamps.

  • Jon
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:18 p.m.

    As a person who is an active and faithful member of the LDS Church, I was embarrassed by this whole Prop 8 thing. I didn't support what the church did RE: Prop 8 and hope it comes out in support of these bills. I'm sick of other members of the church treating me like an apostate because I'm not homophobic.

  • a mormon.
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:18 p.m.

    for all of the negative, immature and inhumane comments left by what i can only assume are LDS members, I say to you ..Shame. Shame on you for misunderstanding gods plan (free agency) and for having feelings of hatred and superiority to any of Gods children. Sin or not, we all sin....and we should love one another as family and treat everyone equal.

  • jim
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:15 p.m.

    29 comments and not one positive gay the d-news blocking opposing views or are all of their readers like-minded monkey robots? with one boring point-of-view, is there any question why d-news circulation keeps declining?

  • Wash your hands of it!
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:11 p.m.

    If I were the church I would throw those letters into the nearest incinerator and be done with it.

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:01 p.m.

    We don't object to those ideas, but that doesn't mean we're going to come out and endorse or support them.

  • Civility doesn't work for you?
    Dec. 22, 2008 6:01 p.m.

    To those folks who disapprove of todays action consider this:

    For weeks these comment boards have been filled with descriptions of gays and lesbians as violent thugs, terrorists, and vandals based on a statistically small number of unfortunate incidents during largely peaceful and legal protests in California. Protests that were highly visible, unflattering to both sides, and plastered across the internet and world media.

    Shouldn't you be happy that todays mail delivery was an incredibly civil way of sending a message? There were no noisy public protests, no bad TV coverage, and no news helicopters buzzing over Temple Square. This civil act of sending letters was about as mild as it gets. It tells me that the emotional response to Prop 8 is winding down and now hopefully something constructive can come out of something so horribly divisive and ugly. And I for one am grateful!

    If you get so disproportionately riled up over something as innocuous as this, then it suggests you don't want dialogue, you just want the gay and lesbian community silenced. That kind of brinkmanship thinking will just make things exponentially worse.

  • Hollywood
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:54 p.m.

    Get ready for a bombardment of movies that pushes the gay and lesbian agenda. Sean Penn has one coming out as does Sigourney Weaver. I saw previews on TV today of Weavers film. It portrays Weaver as a Christian wife who has a son who tells her he is Gay. She angrily tells him it's a sin, not God's will ect ect and that no son of her's is gay. He jumps off an overpass and kills himself. She then 'learns' more about the homosexual community and becomes an advocate for Gay and Lesbian rights ( out of guilt of her son commiting suicide). It does not, however, focus on how parents should handle a situation when a child tells them that they are gay. Not in a hostile way, but rather in a loving way. Someone in the Christian community should make a movie about how life REALLY is.

  • Love that word "Activist"
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:56 p.m.

    Which implies that those of us with family members who are "actively" living gay and lesbian lifestyles exposing themselves to the ravages of AIDS and the HIV virus in contradiction to everything they were taught and believed their whole lives until they "discovered" somehow that this is the way they were since the day they were born are something more in social calculations than those of us "un-activists" who are doing the best we can to live in accordance with God's commandments. It's a great world we live in these days! I want to elevate my social status. Put me down as an "activist" opposed to the activists who are engaged on the letter writing campaign. There, now I feel better already.

  • sarah jane
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:52 p.m.

    After all the protesting against LDS, damaging LDS church buildings, etc., how do these people have the nerve to come to the church asking for anything?
    Wow, I can't believe their nerve.

  • Carol
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:52 p.m.

    Life is short and has enough trials already, I feel children of today will have a hard time understanding what is normal and right! I feel that the gay movement is being shoved down our throats! It's all over TV and the movies, pornagraphy of all sorts is poluting our childrens lives! We will fall as a nation because of not keeping the commandments! Today anything goes whatever anyone feels, but we will pay for the iniquity of our society! We celebrate evil today!!!

  • WWJD
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:49 p.m.

    Matthew 4:17 "From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

    That's what Jesus would do in this situation. He would show love and tell all the gays and lesbians that he loved them, and then he would tell them to repent.

    As a christian, I believe Jesus came to call the "sinners to repentance." We love the gays and lesbians, just as Jesus loved them, but just as Jesus did with the woman caught in adultery, we would call them to repentance.

    Anyone who disagrees with the church asking people to repent, can leave the church, because it is the churches purpose to help people repent. It's the second principle of the gospel.

    Of course, have charity towards all men & women, but all sinners need to repent too.

    My words to the gays: Love you, and you need to repent.

  • Albert C. Montoya
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:49 p.m.

    To LDS Church spokesman Mr. Trotter,
    Until we study the organic law of the land we cannot understand it and thus we make up things about it. The Constitution of the United States of America grants NO rights to churches. All people have a God-given, inalienable right to worship God as they please. The First Amendment puts a RESTRICTION on government in regard to this. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." Please study and speak correctly.

  • Children are a Privilege?
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:37 p.m.

    Privilege denotes that someone else can decide for you. So, when will the state issue licenses that without you won't be allowed to conceive? I'm not exactly sure when I chose to be gay.. oh wait, that's because I didn't. Funny how people that have no clue think they know that someone else chose to be gay. Did you choose to be straight? How did you know that was the right choice? Did you ever try the option? No.. because it's NOT A CHOICE! Religion, however is!

    Silly Mormons, don't say something in print in you're not going to live up to it later on.

    And maybe you should look at other translations of the bible.. oh wait! you like the one that gives you the most power, even tho it has clear contradictions.

  • RE: RE: Anonymous
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:34 p.m.

    What would I do when "Joe and Jim show up at my sacrament meeting?" I would do what Jesus did, call them to repentance, tell them that we love them as children of God, just as Jesus did, then tell them they need to repent or they will go to hell, just as Jesus did with the Pharisees and Saducees. Jesus never backed down to any sinner, he loved them, told him he loved them, showed he loved them, then called them to repentance, as a loving savior does.

    To Joe and Jim: we love you as children of our Heavenly Father, but what you do is an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and you need to repent. What can I do to help you repent?

    That's my message to Joe and Jim.

    Who agrees? Say "I"!

  • no worries
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:31 p.m.

    Lets just hope the thousands of people can feel like they spoke their mind and can finally let it rest.

    These writers apparently have no concept of a prophet who simply speaks what he prayerfully believes is the Lords's will regardless of any outside influence. They don't comprehend that the prophet would do as the Lord wills and will disregard whatever anyone else has to say even if he wants to agree with them.

  • Ironic
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:32 p.m.

    I find it incredibly ironic that gay rights activists are outraged over the Church's involvement in Prop 8, claiming it was an unlawful mix of church and state, yet now the largest LGBT lobbying group and PAC in the U.S. is asking the LDS Church to use the pulpit to benefit their cause.

  • Rights Vs. Privileges
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:22 p.m.

    What you do behind closed doors is your own business, but to clasify people who are gay or lesbian as their own race, or a characteristic in their life which cannot change, is not correct. It is a falicy.

    Sexual preference is a preference, or a choice, not a race. I believe people who choose to be gay deserve simple civil rights that any citizen deserves, but if they want the benefits of having a tax break or the ability to adopt children, that's a different story. I do not believe people who choose to be gay should be allowed to adopt children.

    Do they deserve medical coverage? Absolutely. Do they deserve hospital visitation rights? Absolutely. Do they deserve to be able to marry and adopt children? No. Absolutely not.

    Marriage is between one man and one woman. That's the churches stance, and it is not going to change.

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:17 p.m.

    What are these equal rights that we gays and lesbians supposedly have???? What are the special rights that we supposedly want???? You never explain what they are...please enlighten us so we can you if you are right or just talking to impress yourself.

  • RE: Anonymous | 4:17 p.m.
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:10 p.m.

    So--what are you going to do when Joe and Jim actually come to your sacrament meeting? I honestly hope that you'd never throw them out on their ears, though it would certainly show whether or not you're actually the kind, loving, accepting Christian you claim to be.

    Does it not cross your mind at any point that gays and lesbians, while living a lifestyle that is NOT part of God's plan, are STILL also children of God and deserve compassion and respect?

    Far from all homosexuals are evil at heart, even though what they're DOING is not right. Please stop it with the blanket judgments, stereotyping, and prejudice. You're embarrassing yourselves.

  • Name the movie quote:
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:06 p.m.

    "Wow, a letter! That'll show 'em..."

  • To anyone who supports gay right
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:05 p.m.

    READ ROMAN CHAPTER 1. homosexuality has been an abomination since the beginning. In fact anyone that practices homosexuality or supports it is mocking gods plan.

  • Confused...
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:05 p.m.

    Someone please help me understand this...the gays and lesbians are mad at the LDS church for getting politically involved with Prop 8 yet now they want the church to get politically involved with this bill...whats the difference? Oh wait the first went against what the gays wanted and the second doesn't. Make up your you want the church politically involved or not? Seems hypocritical to me...

  • "special right"
    Dec. 22, 2008 5:05 p.m.

    Yeah, we know what that code word means.

    I agree, however, that this will not soften the heart of the LDS Church. Neither did the Civil Rights Movement or the threat to withhold Statehood
    based on the doctrine of polygamy.

    Oh, wait.

  • Futile
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:56 p.m.

    You could deliver 1,000,000 letters and it wouldn't change the commandments. God's law is not based upon popular opinion or public debate, it is based on doctrine as prescribed by a loving Father in Heaven. It is a hard thing to fight against what is right.

  • jim
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:59 p.m.

    go away guy people. and understand that every state that has voted on the marriage thing has voted no so please go home and in your home do what you may.

  • Jandi
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:53 p.m.

    Why when a liberal bill is passed is it the will of the people but when it fails it is the crazy wacko religious kooks fault? The people have spoken. Better luck next year!

  • Hmmm...
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:51 p.m.

    I think you're all missing the point. It looks like the LGBT community is being civil here. Sure, 27,000 letters is a lot, but like they said, they just want to make sure they all got there. I don't think it would change any minds as far as the LDS church goes, though. Thing is, a lot of members of the church were uncomfortable when the protests were going and a lot of people that belong to the LGBT community were out of hand, but now they do an act of civil protest and we still complain?! Let's just get along, huh? Differences are differences. Gays and Lesbians are people too. Let's not treat them otherwise.

  • What to Expect Next
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:49 p.m.

    Yet another memo for this GLBT activist group: "Does not object" is NOT the same thing as "morally obligated to lead the charge."

    What NOT to expect: The church suddenly becoming a crusader for the rights this group is demanding. Expecting, much less requiring, that the church actively campaign for legislation of this order smacks of pressure tactics and political maneuvering. I wouldn't expect this course of action from the church--and neither should any other reasonable-minded individual.

    What TO expect: The church not standing in the way as the Legislature debates the merits of individual secular/political measures and votes on their passage. In other words, the church *reverts to neutrality* in the absence of a compelling moral dimension to the issue, such as the redefinition of marriage.

    From a strictly personal active-LDS perspective, the Legislature should certainly consider these issues and help resolve the *social* and *economic* inequalities GLBT couples often face. As long as the solutions are equitable and don't compromise morality, no worries. (Redefining marriage is a whole other ballgame, obviously!) Just don't expect the church to campaign FOR these things--you'll be disappointed. The church has other priorities.

  • Mary
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:48 p.m.

    What I find sad is that, after the election, the Church was bombarded with hateful protests, with all kinds of harassment for it's members because we were evil, etc. Now, when that doesn't work, they try a stack of letters. So, if this doesn't work (which I don't see how 27,000 letters can change church doctrine), do we get protested and picketed and screamed at again? Did this same group take duplicate letters to the Catholic church and the Jewish organization? Or are they still just singling out the Mormons? And if so, why?

  • so??
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:38 p.m.

    they honestly think the church is going to reverse their stance on marriage since the history of mankind began?
    Keep writing those letters, though. I guess it's better than tramping through the streets.

  • Already have equal rights
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:40 p.m.

    Those with same-sex attraction already enjoy equal rights under the law.

    What they are looking for is special rights based on their sexual conduct.

    And as the political debate in California shows, they are never satisfied. Civil Union laws in Cali elevated homosexual relationships to on par with real marriage several years ago. And all that did was embolden the radical homosexual activists to sue for the name "marriage" as well so as to set up a federal law suit or a suit in a State like Utah.

    I think decent, moral society has been more than tolerant enough already. The homosexuals need to stop demanding that society accept, condone, celebrate, and reward their sexual conduct.

  • Utah Rose
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:36 p.m.

    Human Rights campaign, hmm. What is your campaign doing to make China have "human rights" for everybody, meaning the right to free speech without being thrown in jail.

    What are you doing for the people in Sudan? They are literally starving to death and need food. Why don't you use your money for fighting for gay marriage to help them?

    And, what are you doing to help the unborn in this country? What services are you providing for mothers who need assistance to have these babies?

    What are you doing to help poor families?

    If you think the LDS church, or any other church that was against Proposition 8, let alone the African Americans (NO THIS IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHT ISSUE) will changed their mind, I have a bridge to sell you.

    Get your hearts in the right places and help other people instead of thinking about your own passions, and you don't need to be religious to do that.

  • Activists?
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:30 p.m.

    You seem remarkably inactive for a group calling itself "activist."

    If the LGBT community spent half as much time arguing their position to the public as to they do trying to bully the Church, they might actually accomplish something.

    The Church has already said it does not oppose equal rights, even some special LGBT rights. But, it's not up to the Chuch to make that case. That's your job.

    Why try to bully the Church into carrying the water for you? It won't work, of course, but that's not really what you want, is it?

    You claim to seek a government-sanctioned partnership with the one you love. So do it. Openly, legally, decently, non-violently, through the political process. Like I would have to do if I wanted to invent a new "civil right" to visit twelve unrelated women in the hospital, or inherit property from my hamster.

    This appears to be just the latest in a series of childish tricks designed to justify whatever mindless namecalling, threats, and violent demonstrations you have in mind as your next tactic.

    You might as well hold your breath until you turn blue.

  • McCleod
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:28 p.m.

    So what?
    I guess I don't understand exactly what it is they want the church to do.
    Does anyone understand what they want?
    Is it just another pat on the back saying "yeah, we understand your gay and . . . good luck?"
    Do they want the church to take up their mantra for more rights?

  • Yeah, Right
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:24 p.m.

    Wow! Tenacity with a capital "T," I must say. All right already. This is getting OLD. The Church has already officially spoken in the Nov. 5th statement. And that was quite generous of them. They have turned the other cheek (and have reminded the entire membership to forgive as well) when church buildings were vandalized, etc. Those who choose to participate in homosexual behaviour have no business telling the first presidency what to do, what to say, and where to say it. I choose to participate in heterosexual behaviour and I wouldn't dream of telling the first presidency what to do. They are cool.

    It may have been some homosexual activists who firebombed Gov. Palin's church building in Wasilla. People were inside it too, but got out safely. Enough is enough.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:21 p.m.

    While these Gay rights activists hand-delivered more than 27,000 letters to the LDS Church's downtown Salt Lake headquarters, how come a "turn around did not take place", and the LDS Church's worker's there hand all of them a free copy of the Book of Mormon and also a free DVD to?. Then after they left, take those 27,000 letters and make "paper airplanes" out of them all, and next time you see them in the streets, toss them at them.

  • Once again
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:21 p.m.

    This is really BAD !!!

    The leaders said that they did not object to the gays getting their equal rights - this would have worked but they had to put in the 5th point dealing with redoing marrige. Now they are going to start yelling and screaming about how we went back on what we said etc... When in reality it was them that did this by adding that last point about marraige. They blew it (once again) and not (once again) they will put all the blame on the church and the people. I think that they did this on purpose just to stir up more trouble and to play the victim all over again..

  • Mike
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:21 p.m.

    To me, the sad thing is that I have to keep seeing this boring nonsense in the news day after day, and will have to do so for the forseeable future; while on the other hand, football season is all too quickly drawing to a close.

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:17 p.m.

    Just what I would like to see, Joe and Jim walking hand in hand coming to Sacrament meeting. They would have to allow their dogs and cats to come in lieu of children. Then I could say to my kids, it's fine to be a homosexual look how happy that eternal union is. Go ahead son the Lord says it's ok. I think those letters just may change Pres. Monsons mind.

  • Eric Larsen
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:15 p.m.

    I find it interesting that the LGBT community seeks the Church's support (as opposed to passive allowance) for these bills. I would be a little surprised if the Church responds positively (i.e. in favor of these bills). While the Church has pushed legislation before, it has done so only when the situation was closely tied to Church doctrine, which doesn't really seem to be the case here.

    The way I see it, the Church would ALLOW such legislation to pass without getting involved, but not actively PROMOTE said legislation.

    I hope those of the LGBT community will respect the Church's right to stay away from active promotion of partner rights, if that's what the Church decides to do.

  • Wasted time
    Dec. 22, 2008 4:13 p.m.

    Seriously, you people would be much better off spending your time doing something else. The Church's actions are based on its doctrine, not on public opinion.