Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LDS to push marriage amendment
The Deseret News ^ | 5-27-2006 | Elaine Jarvik

Posted on 05/27/2006 8:00:47 AM PDT by Utah Girl

Voice your support for a federal marriage amendment, the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints urges in a letter to be read in LDS sacrament meetings Sunday.

The letter, sent to priesthood leaders in the United States, calls on Latter-day Saints to contact their senators to support a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment that would limit lawful marriages to those between a man and a woman.

To further spell out its opposition to same-sex marriages, the amendment states that: "Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman."

A Senate vote on the resolution is expected the week of June 5. A previous vote failed in the Senate but passed the House. Any future amendment would require approval by two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states.

The LDS Church posted its letter to priesthood leaders on its Web site, but its communications office declined to comment further.

"We, as the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, have repeatedly set forth our position that the marriage of a man and a woman is the only acceptable marriage relationship," the letter reads.

"Disappointing," says openly gay state Sen. Scott McCoy about the letter. "It's no surprise as to what the church's position is on same-sex marriage and the amendment," says McCoy, D-Salt Lake. "But I find it disappointing that the church is being drawn into what is nothing more than election year grandstanding on the part of the Republican Party. It's an attempt to distract voters from the total mismanagement of the country they've been responsible for in the past two years."

News of the letter was received with a "Great!" at the conservative, Colorado-based Focus on the Family. "The timing is wonderful," says Peter Brandt, senior director of public policy. Focus on the Family has sent out its own letter to 135,000 U.S. pastors, offering them pre-printed postcards in support of the amendment. "We've distributed a million or so postcards," Brandt says. The group has also launched phone campaigns in 14 states where Senate members voted against the amendment the last time. Utah is not on the list.

Religious groups are also lining up for and against the proposed amendment.

A coalition calling itself Clergy for Fairness is campaigning against it. Among its members are leaders of Reform Judaism, the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church and the United Church of Christ.

Last month the LDS Church officially signed on to another letter, written on behalf of the Religious Coalition for Marriage, that called for a national marriage amendment. Elder Russell M. Nelson, a member of the church's Quorum of the Twelve, signed the letter along with 49 other religious leaders from around the country.

In 2004, two-thirds of Utah voters passed a state version of the marriage amendment, which changed the Utah Constitution to specifically ban gay marriages. Four months earlier, the First Presidency of the LDS Church issued a brief statement saying that the church "favors a constitutional amendment preserving marriage as the lawful union of a man and a woman."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fma; homosexualagenda; ldschurch; marriageamendment; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-179 next last

1 posted on 05/27/2006 8:00:48 AM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

LDS leaders' letter.

The following letter has been sent by the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to church leaders in the United States:

We are informed that the United States Senate will on June 6, 2006, vote on an amendment to the federal Constitution designed to protect the traditional institution of marriage.

We, as the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, have repeatedly set forth our position that the marriage of a man and a woman is the only acceptable marriage relationship.

In 1995 we issued a Proclamation to the World on this matter, and have repeatedly reaffirmed that position.

In that proclamation we said: "We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society."

We urge our members to express themselves on this urgent matter to their elected representatives in the Senate.

2 posted on 05/27/2006 8:02:39 AM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl

I saw LDS and thought LSD. I need COFFEE now.


3 posted on 05/27/2006 8:02:52 AM PDT by buffyt (America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our people. Pres. George Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl

constitutional amendment that would limit lawful marriages to those between a man and a woman. woman=WOMEN


4 posted on 05/27/2006 8:07:42 AM PDT by showme_the_Glory (No more rhyming, and I mean it! ..Anybody want a peanut.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
If they mobilize their people in every state like they did in California in 2000, this will be a fait acompli.

The Mormons are very organized and ideally suited to coordinate with a campaign. I'm glad they are getting involved again.
5 posted on 05/27/2006 8:08:34 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (California bashers will be called out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl

Every state should have the right to decide for themselves. Article IV of the Constitution combined with the DOMA ensures that my state does not have to recognize non-traditional marriages from other states.


6 posted on 05/27/2006 8:13:07 AM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: showme_the_Glory
"constitutional amendment that would limit lawful marriages to those between a man and a woman. woman=WOMEN"


I doubt that is their intention. If anything, it is the opposite. The LAST thing the church wants, is for polygamy to become legal. That is a can of worms they don't want to open, no matter what. In essence, for LDS faithful, the church is trying to tie G-d's hands on the matter. It doesn't matter what He wants. Sad, really...
7 posted on 05/27/2006 8:15:17 AM PDT by nralife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MACVSOG68
Every state should have the right to decide for themselves

The way every state should have the right to set abortion laws for themselves? Like that?

8 posted on 05/27/2006 8:20:32 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (California bashers will be called out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nralife

?


9 posted on 05/27/2006 8:27:31 AM PDT by Boazo (From the mind of BOAZO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
The way every state should have the right to set abortion laws for themselves? Like that?

Precisely. Which is why I want Roe repealed.

10 posted on 05/27/2006 8:29:47 AM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: buffyt
I saw LDS and thought LSD. I need COFFEE now.

Oh, oh!! The Mormons wouldn't like that!

11 posted on 05/27/2006 8:31:29 AM PDT by hunter112 (Total victory at home and in the Middle East!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

Works for me.


12 posted on 05/27/2006 8:34:23 AM PDT by mrhansen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nralife

"the church is trying to tie G-d's hands on the matter. It doesn't matter what He wants. Sad, really..."


Not so. For the LDS faithful, God has made a proclamation on polygamy. Thus the church no longer condones or endorses polygamy in any form. Those that do are ex-communicated and are not allowed fellowship with the church any longer.

As for them trying to secretly bring it back, what nonsence.


13 posted on 05/27/2006 8:39:18 AM PDT by MD_2_BE ("Governments arise either out of the people or over the people." -- Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MD_2_BE
And which select individual did God make this 'proclamation' to?

I'm sure God didn't say beans on the matter; the head cult leaders just didn't want the feds busting up their organization .

didn't Joseph Smith 'marry' some pre-teens like mohammed?
14 posted on 05/27/2006 8:46:36 AM PDT by mrhansen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nralife

>>I doubt that is their intention. If anything, it is the opposite.
>>The LAST thing the church wants, is for polygamy to become legal.
>>That is a can of worms they don't want to open, no matter what.

Yeah, we fought all the way to the Supreme Court for it, so we don’t want it legalized now. Your leaps in logic astound me. (Why am I hearing echoes of “Everything that’s up should be down, and everything that’s down…”)


>>In essence, for LDS faithful, the church is trying to tie G-d's hands on the matter.
>>It doesn't matter what He wants. Sad, really...

So, in your mind, God wants same sex marriage? I thought he was very vocal in the Old, and New Testaments about that. Sound’s like he’s being consistent and that the LDS are just in step with him. (On this one issue at least, you should agree)

BTW, I am a Mormon (LDS), if that matters to you.


15 posted on 05/27/2006 8:47:43 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Boazo
"?"


The LDS church's stated reason back in 1890 for stopping the practice of polygamy, was because it was against the law of the land. The Federal government was coming down hard on the Saints back in the late 1800s.

In today's world, there is no way the church wants polygamy to EVER become legal, and it very will could be if gays are allowed to marry. It would be a PR nightmare and would open up a can of worms that the church doesn't want to open.

Backing an amendment defining marriage, is in effect tying G-d's hands should He decide it is time to restore the practice of Celestial plural marriage.

Talk about hubris and a total disregard for agency....

16 posted on 05/27/2006 8:50:37 AM PDT by nralife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MD_2_BE

What part of honoring and obeying the laws of the land is stumping you? It’s part of our beliefs as outlined by Joseph Smith.

The proclamation by the church was stating that we would abide by the Law, not declaring it just. (http://scriptures.lds.org/od/1 )

“Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.”

And no this does not mean we are trying to “Bring it back”.

Do some homework before you post slander about a religion /Rant


17 posted on 05/27/2006 8:55:53 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DelphiUser

"So, in your mind, God wants same sex marriage?"


No, but He wants AGENCY. Whatever happened to "teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves"?

Also see post #16....


18 posted on 05/27/2006 8:57:00 AM PDT by nralife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MD_2_BE
"As for them trying to secretly bring it back, what nonsence."



That was showme_the_Glory suggesting such a thing, not me. The church is doing everything possible to make sure polygamy is never legal.
19 posted on 05/27/2006 9:00:31 AM PDT by nralife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mrhansen

>>And which select individual did God make this 'proclamation' to?

Can you prove he didn’t? (Crickets…) I thought so.

>>I'm sure God didn't say beans on the matter; the head cult leaders just didn't
>>want the feds busting up their organization .

And you have knowledge of this how?

>>didn't Joseph Smith 'marry' some pre-teens like mohammed?

No, not “just like Mohammad”, what a slanderous, smarmy tactic. Were you unable to find a way to bring in Hitler and Pol Pot in your character assassination by association?

Did you learn to do that at DU, or does it come naturally?


20 posted on 05/27/2006 9:04:27 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-179 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson