http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2008/11/10/seattles-anti-prop-8-march-this-saturday Comments On: Seattle's Anti-Prop 8 March This Saturday by Dominic Holden en-us Copyright 2009 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0800 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:15:00 -0800 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by MM]]> Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:07:53 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Kate Grutz]]> Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:19:10 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Carlos]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:28:37 -0800 The Stranger
May God bless all of you.
Posted by Nita]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:32:52 -0800 The Stranger
If you're going to quote the scriptures then please quote all of it. D&C 134:4 is referring to the First Amendment, the government and people's right to practice their religion. Last time I checked being gay isn't a religion.

The full scripture says, " We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others; but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms of public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul."

Alma 30:7 again is referring to the persons right to practice religion, that you should follow the Lord but you have the agency to choose who you will serve. It says "Now there was no law against a man's belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds." And continuing onto verse 8 it says, "For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve."

We do NOT believe that having same-gender attraction in a sin. Acting on those feelings is where the sin comes into play. Here is a quote from one of our Apostles, Elder Oaks, "The distinction between feelings or inclinations on the one hand, and behavior on the other hand, is very clear. It’s no sin to have inclinations that if yielded to would produce behavior that would be a transgression. The sin is in yielding to temptation. Temptation is not unique. Even the Savior was tempted."

We made covenants with the Lord to stand up and defend His plan and teachings. That is why the First Presidency came out and reaffirmed the churches stance on gay marriage. This was NOT a new thing. A letter was read to all the members in California. It is not the first time the Church has read such letters and they don't have to. Often times moral issues come up during our lessons on Sundays. And our lessons are taught by members who are asked to teach. Anyone can be asked to teach or speak in our Sacrament services. Even our youth (ages 12-18) give 5 minute talks each week. We do NOT have any paid clergy.

When you are baptized and go through the Temple you make covenants; one of which is giving our time, talents and means to protect and share the gospel. In 1995 the First Presidency made a proclamation to the world. It is called, "The Family A Proclamation to the World" In it the church publically states to the world what the Lord’s plan is for the family unit. It states,
" The Family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan." This is a Celestial law; not something we made up.

Please read it in it’s entirety.

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnext…

I don't mind all the protests. Everyone has a right to stand up for what they believe in but the out range and violence directed at us and the vandalism at the Lord's house and our sacred places of worship is uncalled for and illegal. If you or any other group or religion was experiencing this it would be called a hate crime.

The major group that passed Prop 8 were minorities; not Mormons. Yes our members supported it but we were not the only religious group who did. NO money was giving by the church itself. Donations were PRIVATE donations and yes some of those people were Mormon. But that is not any different then those who support gay rights and ask people to donate money. Those groups are also a not for profit group.

Here are two statements given by a Catholic Bishops:

http://newsroom.lds.org/Static%20Files/N…

http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/…

I only ask that if you're going to protest and express yourself on blogs that you take the time to find out the truth about what a religion believes before you attack it. I know that most of you do not agree with our beliefs and that's okay. If you want to know what we believe we have two great websites. You can look up any thing you want to know.

www.lds.org and www.mormon.org

If you want to know what the church's official stance is on same-gender attraction then go to the Newsroom part of the website. There you will find the churches official stance on all moral issues. Here is the link for the same gender attraction.

http://www.newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/…

I know we will not agree but maybe we could at least understand each other a little better and be civil towards each other. You are a child of God, I am a child of God. We are all His children. He loves all of us and despite what you think so does The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.




Posted by Nita]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:25:55 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Adina]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:58:35 -0800 The Stranger
*Shrug*
Posted by Sakuyababy]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 13:10:41 -0800 The Stranger
Basically we are saying ... civil rights are for sale. Don't for Mormons ... if your religion was put to a vote in the South, I guarantee you that you would be marginalized or banned. Why do you think Huckabee kicked Romney's a*s in the South.

It's time to say ENOUGH is ENOUGH and while doing so, let's all remember we go protest, that we are doing so for something bigger than ourselves and our actions are perceived according.

Organize. Mobilize. Creat Change. Let's go . . .
Posted by ALsoutherner]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:26:57 -0800 The Stranger
1. I have spoken with many mormons here in seattle. not one was ever asked to contribute to CA's efforts, nor was any letter ever read in their meetings.

2. the church (check its own website and historical record) has never opposed same-sex domestic parternship rights. The church leader that led efforts in CA came out and himself said that the church did not oppose civil unions, that their issue is with defining "marriage," not state-sanctioned civil unions.

3. there are many, many gay mormons. yes, even openly-gay mormons. one is not ex-communicated for being gay. one can be excommunicated for having sex outside of marriage, though excommunications in the faith are not nearly as common as everyone would like to think.

4. why get all riled up at the local seattle church, when it was church members in CA who largely backed this? church money was not used, church funds were not transferred from the WA church to the CA church. individual church members wrote the checks, not the church.

5. finally, watch olbermann's commentary. brilliant. we should all be so well spoken.

6. let's follow MLK's example and love and persuade gently and deliberately, not irrationally and in a mean-spirited way. many of us, i fear, are exhibiting some of the same bigoted nature that we're decrying in our religious friends and fellow-men and fellow-women.
Posted by jamie]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:42:13 -0800 The Stranger Posted by True]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:20:25 -0800 The Stranger
Change it so under "Law" you'd have to have civil unions that would legally recognize the partnership. And you'd be able to get all the benefits that anyone should be allowed to have between two consenting adults. Problem fixed.
Posted by Sammuel]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:49:30 -0800 The Stranger
Change it so under "Law" you'd have to have civil unions that would legally recognize the partnership. And you'd be able to get all the benefits that anyone should be allowed to have between two consenting adults. Problem fixed.
Posted by Sammuel]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:47:50 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Lonnie]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:48:40 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Lonnie]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:42:23 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Dave]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:16:27 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Klint Kendrick]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:14:20 -0800 The Stranger Posted by huh]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:06:11 -0800 The Stranger Posted by huh]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:00:14 -0800 The Stranger Posted by L]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:27:53 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Jackie]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:20:03 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Nellie]]> Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:46:47 -0800 The Stranger Posted by NapoleonXIV]]> Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:47:06 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Andy Niable]]> Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:44:31 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Andy Niable]]> Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:32:33 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Jubilation T. Cornball]]> Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:18:06 -0800 The Stranger