Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Sex and Relationships

The Mormon Church Is Leading the Fight Against Gay Marriage in California

By Ray Ring, High Country News. Posted October 22, 2008.


California's Prop. 8 has exploded into an expensive, extensive battle between religious conservatives and gay rights advocates.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

REXBURG, IDAHO -- America's Family Community." That's the motto of this Mormon college town, displayed on street-side monuments and in tall letters on the movie-theater marquee. Apparently, it's a formula for success. Rexburg thrives on a burst of construction and population growth. More than 30,000 residents occupy a grid of wide, orderly streets, amid vast potato fields that unfurl toward the majestic Teton Peaks. Plenty of Rexburg parents, following the Mormon prescription for big families, have six or seven children. One guy tells me his next-door neighbors have 13 children, and a family on the other side has 16. The newly expanded hospital maternity unit is already crowded with new babies. If Rexburg is any indication, Mormons are taking over the world.

They certainly run this town. An estimated 97 percent of the locals belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- making Rexburg possibly the most Mormon of all towns. The brilliant white-stone 57,000-square-foot Mormon temple, opened eight months ago, looms on a hilltop, glowing day and night; intense floodlights make Mormon temples the brightest objects in the Western nights. The college that sprawls beside the temple -- Brigham Young University-Idaho -- now boasts an annual enrollment of 21,000 students, more than double what it had eight years ago.

Mormon mores -- some written into local laws -- permeate the community. Rexburg has no real saloon and no supply of hard liquor; only four restaurants are licensed to serve beer or wine. There is only one coffee shop, and it keeps up with the meager caffeine demand by brewing each cup individually. When I cruise town on a pleasant Saturday night in mid-September, the hottest action comes down in a bowling alley: Balls crash down all 16 lanes while the spinning pins and the bowlers' teeth glow even whiter under the ultraviolet lighting.

But something louder and bigger draws me to Rexburg: the religious culture wars, which heat up every election season. Prophets who run the Mormon Church -- the church president, his top counselors and a dozen top apostles, based in the headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah -- encourage all Mormons to be active in politics. The prophets are said to be relaying the word of God, and while they generally don't endorse candidates, they take stands on issues such as abortion and homosexuality. As a result, most Mormons vote very Republican. In the last presidential election, nearly 92 percent of the votes in Madison County (Rexburg is the county seat) went to George W. Bush -- securing Rexburg yet another title: the nation's most Republican town.

On the most critical issues, the Mormon prophets go all out, urging their followers to conduct targeted campaigns. That helps explain why, Thursday evenings in the downtown building of a health-products company owned by one of Idaho's richest Mormons, groups of Rexburg college students and townies get together. They're using the company's call center to make call after call to California voters, trying to persuade them to pass a ballot measure in the November election. It's titled Proposition 8 -- the California Marriage Protection Amendment -- and it aims to prevent gay and lesbian people from getting married in that state.

An eight-year battle led to Proposition 8. In 2000, with Mormon encouragement and campaign money, California voters passed a measure banning gay marriage. It blew up again last May, when the California Supreme Court justices narrowly ruled (four to three) that the ban violated the civil rights of gays and lesbians. The court likened it to the bans many states once had against interracial marriage, all of which were tossed out long ago. Now, Proposition 8 aims to overrule the California Supreme Court, by amending the state Constitution.

Many religious groups have jumped into the campaign; the Mormon Church takes the lead. In June, the church's top prophets commanded Mormons "to do all you can" to work for Proposition 8 and donate money to the campaign. Mormon leaders throughout California read the instructions to their congregations, which have more than 750,000 members. Word spread everywhere in the Mormon realm. In August, the prophets added pages of elaboration: "The Church has a single, undeviating standard of sexual morality: intimate relations are proper only between a husband and a wife united in bonds of matrimony. ... Any dilution of the traditional definition of marriage will further erode the already weakened stability of marriages and family generally ... with harmful consequences for society." Mormon volunteers, additionally inspired by special TV broadcasts beamed from the headquarters into their churches, go door-to-door in California for Proposition 8. In other states, they run phone banks and do whatever they can. Their effort is strongest in the West, because there are more Mormons in this region than anywhere else. Chad Reiser, a leader of the BYU-Idaho College Republican Club, says the phone banks are not an official club activity, but "we do try to get as many people involved as possible. Proposition 8 is a moral issue" related to church doctrine -- "something we believe is important to all people."

Kim B. Clark, the president of BYU-Idaho and a pillar of Rexburg's Mormon establishment, receives me in his office on a sunny Tuesday morning. His windows look out on construction cranes erecting a huge events center that will have a 15,000-seat auditorium and 10 basketball courts. He talks of more university projects. He appears confident, and wears a pinstripe charcoal suit and red-pattern necktie, with a well-thumbed 2,000-page book of scriptures within reach. He grew up a Western Mormon in Utah and Washington, earned a Ph.D. at Harvard University and ran the Harvard Business School. He left Harvard three years ago, because the top prophet invited him to shape this college. It was "like getting a call from Moses," Clark says.

When I ask Clark about his church's campaign against gay marriage in California, I note that some people consider it a violation of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights -- which mandate the separation of church and state. He strongly disagrees. Those who would limit his church's work against homosexuality, he says, "cloak their arguments in other terms ... (such as) civil rights ... but their fundamental purpose is to destroy religion in our society."

He says these battles will occur more and more frequently: "We're seeing a change in the political environment and interest groups. ... It takes many different forms. It's not directed at any particular religion. It's driven by people who are against religion."

As over-the-top as that sounds, Proposition 8 is a Western showdown with national implications. Hollywood celebrities, civil-rights groups, dissident Mormons, mega-businesses such as Google, politicians and other interests around the country have also jumped in. Shortly, the election results on Proposition 8 will create a new landmark signifying how much influence religions can assert on our modern society. Behind all the fury, I find something unexpected in the Rexburg area. It seems to me, despite appearances, the Mormon Church may be losing its grip.

Religious culture wars erupt constantly in this country, in squabbles over reciting prayers in government meetings, putting Christian monuments on public property, mentioning God in the Pledge of Allegiance -- even over God's opinion about building a gas pipeline from Alaska to the Lower 48 states. (Sarah Palin says He backs the pipeline.)

Gay rights and abortion are the two fiercest battlegrounds. But since a basic right to abortion was established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, abortion foes have only been able to chip fragments off that right (requiring underage girls to get permission from a parent, and so on); they also push for appointing sympathetic Supreme Court justices, who could theoretically overturn Roe v. Wade. Meanwhile, gay marriage has gradually taken on more importance.

Overt conflicts over legislating the rights of gays and lesbians began some three decades ago, and ever since, the West has been a fierce battleground. In the early 1990s, liberal-leaning Colorado cities and the state government made laws protecting gays from housing and employment discrimination. In response, anti-gay religious forces successfully pushed a 1992 amendment to the Colorado Constitution, stating that gays could not be considered a minority and therefore could not claim discrimination. That earned Colorado an ugly nickname -- "The Hate State" -- until 1996, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the amendment violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

James Dobson, the right-wing evangelical who runs the Focus on the Family group, moved his headquarters from California to Colorado Springs in 1991 and rode the anti-gay campaign to worldwide prominence. Today, Dobson has a daily TV show, and his daily radio program runs on more than 5,000 stations. When he mobilized his followers against abortion-rights Democratic senators running for re-election several years ago, The New York Times crowned him as "the nation's most influential evangelical leader ... (showing) a new level of direct partisan engagement."

The West's reputation for anti-gayness was furthered by the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, a gay University of Wyoming student. Two homophobic men tied Shepard to a fence outside Laramie, pistol-whipped him and left him to die. The murder became the basis for a widely performed play and documentary movie -- The Laramie Project -- and other movies and books also helped raise awareness about the struggles of gays and lesbians. Many governments around the country have responded by passing laws prohibiting discrimination against gay people. The anti-gay religious forces have tried to hold the line on marriage. In 1996, they pushed the Defense of Marriage Act through a then-Republican Congress. The law says that the federal government does not recognize gay marriage, and that all states are not required to recognize gay marriages held in the few states that allow it (at the moment, only Massachusetts, Connecticut and California do). Anti-gay advocates have also pushed laws banning gay marriage in many states, including Colorado, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Washington. The bans prevent gays from getting married in courthouses, and prevent pro-gay-marriage preachers from performing ceremonies. Gay-rights advocates have pushed back, winning compromises, mainly an increasing acceptance of domestic partnerships or "civil unions." Civil unions can provide some of the rights inherent in marriage, but it's complicated; for couples trying to share health insurance, for instance, it depends on interactions of many different state laws and insurance companies' policies. Even many Democrats -- the party that gets the most gay votes -- feel compelled to take stands against gay marriage. Although he supports civil unions, Barack Obama, for instance, describes marriage as "a union between a man and a woman. ... For me as a Christian, it is a sacred union. God's in the mix."

Today, the West's key players on gay marriage include the Alliance Defense Fund, a nonprofit lawfirm based in Scottsdale, Ariz. It has 40 lawyers on staff, according to its Web site, and works with "nearly 1,100 attorneys nationwide" advocating for a Christian presence in national parks, city council meetings and other venues. The Alliance Defense Fund often goes to court against gay marriage, and represents the "Yes on Proposition 8" campaign in California. "God has granted us an amazing opportunity to serve Him" in courtrooms, the firm says. "God created marriage as the unity of one man and one woman. This has been both the legal and traditional understanding of a marriage ... for millennia, since Eden (referring to the Bible story that the first man and woman met in the Garden of Eden). ... There is no more critical battle for our nation's future."

On the other side, the West is home to groups such as the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. Based in Albuquerque, N.M., it challenges the growing evangelical Christian influence in the U.S. military. Generals and other officers often pressure their soldiers to join in Christian prayers and read the Bible -- even to play Christian video games. And the military's evangelical tone includes "virulent homophobia," says the group's founder, Mikey Weinstein. He's a Jewish graduate of the Air Force Academy, a lawyer and registered Republican, who speaks rapid-fire about "religious predation by military superiors (who are) fundamentalist Christians -- the draconian specter of military command influence" being used to commit "spiritual rape."

More than 9,000 active and retired military people -- including gays and lesbians in uniform, "highly decorated combat vets" and generals -- have complained to Weinstein's group about the pressure they face, he says. The group currently has two lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Defense in an attempt to make the military evangelicals back off. The group's supporters include former Colorado Gov. Dick Lamm and the California Council of Churches IMPACT group, which represents more than 5,000 churches serving 21 Protestant denominations. "We have some gay people on the advisory board" of the group, Weinstein says, and "it's possible -- though not on our scope right now" that someday he'll go to court specifically to try to force the military to be more accepting of gays and gay marriage. "Anybody who is against gay rights," he says, "is an enemy of ours."

And a basic regional character trait can mean rough going for the anti-gay forces: Westerners in general show a remarkable skepticism toward organized religion. Oregon is the least church-going state in the country, with 27 percent of its adults saying they're unaffiliated with any religion. Washington, California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado all rank above 20 percent, according to a 2008 survey by the Pew Charitable Trusts' Forum on Religion & Public Life. (Only New England rivals the West in the rate of rejecting organized religion.)

Whatever happens in November, California's Proposition 8 will be an important landmark. Not only does California have 37 million residents, it also has a legendary trend-setting role. And California's increasing diversity raises the odds that a majority of its voters would support gay marriage in 2008.

Thus, Proposition 8 has exploded into the most expensive, extensive gay-marriage battle ever. The forces pushing it include all the Mormons who've made individual campaign donations totaling more than $9 million (more than 40 percent of the war chest, the Mormons for Proposition 8 group reported in mid-October). Conservative Catholics, including the Knights of Columbus, have kicked in more than $1 million. Other notable backers include Dobson's Focus on the Family (about $500,000), a wealthy board member of that group ($450,000), an Orthodox Jewish group based in New York City, evangelical groups from all over, miscellaneous Baptists and Muslims and Sikhs, the National Organization for Marriage (about $950,000), the American Family Association ($500,000), a couple of right-wing foundations ($1.5 million), and countless Republicans who don't necessarily belong to any of the other groups.

The forces against Proposition 8 include local governments, such as the Palm Springs City Council. Episcopal bishops oppose it, preaching tolerance, as does a lone Catholic priest in the Fresno area, who recently told his congregation that he's gay. Many businesses oppose Proposition 8, including the giant utility, Pacific Gas & Electric ($250,000 to the campaign against Proposition 8), AT&T ($25,000), and the Levi Strauss jeans company ($25,000 from the company and $100,000 from the company's chairman emeritus and his wife). The Valley Industry and Commerce Association, in the Los Angeles area, opposes 8. Google, based in California's Silicon Valley, normally stays out of politics, but Sergey Brin, the company's co-founder and president, offers this statement: "While we respect the strongly-held beliefs that people have on both sides of this argument, we see this fundamentally as an issue of equality. We should not eliminate anyone's fundamental rights, whatever their sexuality, to marry the person they love."

Actor Brad Pitt ($100,000) and director Steven Spielberg ($100,000), many unions, Unitarians, miscellaneous rabbis and Presbyterians, psychiatrists' and psychologists' groups, the Gray Panthers and the American Civil Liberties Union ($1.5 million) oppose Proposition 8. So does the Human Rights Campaign ($2 million), the National Center for Lesbian Rights ($500,000), the Chinese Rainbow Association, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force ($200,000-plus) and Tim Gill, the Denver-based founder of the Quark software company ($350,000). Democratic New York Gov. David Paterson has come out against it, as has Republican California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein tells a gay magazine: "The views of Californians on this issue have changed over time ... I believe we should uphold the ability of our friends, neighbors, and co-workers who are gay and lesbian to enter into the contract of marriage." The Log Cabin Republicans, a gay group, runs Republicans Against 8, which pays for TV ads against the proposition.

Californians passed their initial gay-marriage ban by a wide margin (61 percent to 39 percent). The margin on Proposition 8 is closer and less certain. Polling up to late September indicated a slim majority had emerged in support of gay marriage. Then the first statewide TV ads from the other side aired -- claiming gay marriage is being forced on churches and public school curriculums -- and the polling suddenly tipped the other way. With a total of $27 million donated to the Proposition 8 campaign, and $19 million against it, it'll likely be a photo finish.

Many straight people -- regardless of their religion or lack of it -- have become more accepting of gay marriage. "They know a lot more about gay people. Maybe they know someone who is gay, which makes a huge difference. They know gay people are just people," says Bruce Bastian, who grew up Mormon in Idaho and then moved to Utah. Eventually, he came out as a gay and gave up the Mormon Church. He got rich by founding the WordPerfect software company, and he's donated more than $1 million to the campaign against Proposition 8.

The Mormons fled the Eastern U.S. in the 1800s to escape religious persecution, and they've done well out West. The 178-year-old church -- an infant compared to most major religions -- has grown rapidly; it has more than 13 million members worldwide, including more than 4 million in the West. Now it's powerful enough to enforce some of its doctrines on whoever lives in its Western strongholds. In Utah, for instance, anyone who wants a glass of hard liquor must join a private club, provide personal information and pay a fee.

At a glance, Rexburg seems to demonstrate what happens when a religion takes over completely. Almost all the city and county officials are Mormon Republicans. The leading industry, BYU-Idaho, has woven Mormon doctrine throughout its classes. Students must obey an honor code that's even more conservative than the main BYU campus in Provo, Utah: no beards, no mustaches below the mouth corners, no hair dyed "unnatural colors," no shorts on campus, no sandals in public places, no "gaucho-style pants above the ankle" and so on. Students live in BYU-approved apartments sporting signs like "Approved Housing for Young Ladies." Curfew is midnight, except on Fridays, when it's extended for one hour.

"Choose your friends carefully," warns a 47-page Mormon rulebook called For the Strength of Youth. "Choose friends who share your values so you can strengthen and encourage each other in living high standards." Watch out for Satan's lures in "websites, concerts, movies, music, video cassettes, DVDs, books, magazines, pictures and other media." As for sexual behavior, even "passionate kissing" is forbidden until the marriage ceremony is performed. The expectation is for Mormons to get married young -- men go on two-year missions when they're 19, and come back ready to settle down.

All the college teachers and staff must also be Mormons in good standing. If they waver, they can be fired -- even the professors have no tenure, no job security. Meanwhile, the Rexburg city government Web site offers information on the "Mormon Way of Doing Business."

What has Rexburg achieved with its sexual taboos and strict moral standards? Conventional wisdom says the town and college provide security -- a safe place to live. But as I dig into the records, I find that in the past year alone, Rexburg has experienced a fair amount of insecurity. There have been many thefts from businesses, residences and parked cars; cases of embezzlement, attempted rape, and domestic abuse; a major drug ring stretching to other states; shots fired in road rage; underage drinking in a Mormon church; attempted suicide; a faked kidnapping; and at least 10 pedestrians run down in crosswalks (two of them died). Child pornography was discovered on two men's computers, and another guy was found to have molested kids for the past 29 years. In one case of child abuse, a father repeatedly dropped and squeezed his infant, to the point of breaking bones. Some of the incidents seem downright bizarre, fodder for the pages of supermarket tabloids: A man caught masturbating in the city library, and an apparently mentally disturbed person climbing out onto the roof of the temple. In a nearby town, an illegal immigrant impregnated a 9-year-old girl. (She was 10 years old when she gave birth to a 6-pound baby, by caesarian section, in the Rexburg hospital.) A local cop, himself a Mormon, tells me he's seen "countless" child abuse cases, at least six kids beaten to death, and many suicides in his two decades on the job. He says Rexburg's Mormon community is in "total denial" about this kind of stuff. "Religion has nothing to do with crime," he observes. "It comes down to human behavior, human nature."

Rexburg does achieve a superficial sameness among its residents, an exclusion of those who seem different. It feels safe in that sense. People who might want good coffee to be handy, or a drink of hard liquor, or an abortion, or gay sex, or passionate kissing before marriage without shame -- and people who consider such people interesting and worthwhile -- apparently go elsewhere to live.

On a Rexburg Sunday, the streets are especially quiet; the Mormon Church requires its members to attend no less than three hours of Sunday service, plus other family and religious activities. Even the Subway, Quiznos and Cold Stone Creamery are closed. (In a true Battle of the Titans, even Wal-Mart closed on Sundays for the first six months it did business here; then it decided to stay open.) Mormon preaching and music plays on radio and TV all day. Despite the religious grip, though, there is some dissent. Elsewhere, some Mormons have openly called for an end to discrimination against gay people. And dissenters have made themselves heard in the past -- sometimes successfully. Until 1978, the church held that black skin was caused by God's curse, and in its early years, Mormons notoriously embraced polygamy and confined women strictly to child-rearing. (Even today, there are still no blacks and women in the church's top leadership roles.)

Affirmation is a worldwide organization of gay and lesbian Mormons, with chapters spread from California to London and Johannesburg, South Africa. PFLAG (Parents, Families & Friends of Lesbians and Gays) is a national group with more than 200,000 members. By contacting both groups, I network into a different local scene. It includes Rexburg but centers on Idaho Falls, the effective capital of Mormon Idaho -- those dozen or so counties that lie closest to Utah and have populations that are more than 50 percent Mormon. As I drive the 27 miles from Rexburg to Idaho Falls, a Mormon on the car radio preaches: "We cannot expect God's help if we are unwilling to keep His commandments."

Between the cities, the last cuttings of hay lie baled in the fields. Cottonwoods and brush are turning autumn colors. Idaho Falls has about 53,000 residents, an old downtown on the Snake River banks and a sprawl of newer malls and neighborhoods. A federal nuclear lab and several small non-Mormon colleges draw an array of people who somewhat counterbalance Idaho Falls' Mormon temple, but still, the city is roughly 54 percent Mormon. When July 4th falls on a Sunday, Idaho Falls shifts its fireworks to July 3rd or July 5th. I find Dixie's Diner, which has an American flag flapping overhead and a kitschy 1950s-motif: red vinyl seats and chrome trim. In the banquet room in back, I meet the Gay Sunday Brunch group -- several dozen gay guys and a few lesbians who meet in the diner every Sunday.

Christopher Jones, 33, grew up Mormon in Rexburg and tells me that it was "very confusing." He's sitting beside Danny Yandell, who is 43 and speaks with an Arkansas drawl; Yandell's been around here 14 years working as a surgical nurse. Jones and Yandell have been together about a year-and-a-half and like to go camping, hunting, and fishing. They flew to California in August to get married in a Unitarian church. "I wanted a church wedding because I'm spiritual," Yandell says.

Mart Borg, who describes himself as an inactive Mormon, works as a butcher in an Albertson's grocery store. On the side, he runs a hiking-with-llamas group for gays. He went to California this summer to marry the man he's been with for 20 years. "We exchanged rings 20 years ago; we just wanted to make it legal," Borg tells me.

I get to know other gays and lesbians in Mormon Idaho, and some who have roots here but have since moved on. They're teachers, a city planner, experts in this or that at the nuclear lab, a sales manager at a printing plant, and so on. Many grew up in the Mormon Church, and their accomplishments include serving on missions, serving as church leaders, even singing in the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. They felt the church's pressure to live straight lives. Officially, the church seeks to persuade homosexuals to abstain or be heterosexual, through counseling and pressing them to marry members of the opposite sex. "I saw gay men struggling with their sense of self-worth (in counseling), and I didn't see them as an abomination of God," says John Bonner, who grew up gay in Rexburg and now lives in Salt Lake City. Two of his gay friends committed suicide, and he thinks it was directly tied to their Mormon faith. "They saw it as irresolvable."

They tell me that even the ranks of straight Mormons are not monolithic. Jones realized he was gay in grade school, but "took a long time to come out because people in Rexburg are very judgmental." He had two friends who risked coming out while they attended high school in Rexburg. Their Mormon bishops ex-communicated them -- a big deal for faithful Mormons, because their doctrine says they won't join their families and friends in heaven. Jones' sister outed him to his bishop when he was 21. But "that bishop was a very understanding person," Jones says. "He had the opportunity to ex-communicate me and didn't. He wished I'd been celibate (and not gay), but he wasn't pressing the normal gospel of 'men with men is a sin.' He just said, as long as I live a good life, he was happy for me." Jones, who's worked as a bank teller, a Burger King manager, a grocery manager, and at the Idaho Falls Wal-Mart, also still considers himself a Mormon.

And those who reject the Mormon Church still try to maintain ties to Mormon friends and family, including ex-wives, kids, parents and siblings. Often they're accepted in those ranks. When Jones and Yandell came back from California, they had a wedding reception in Idaho Falls, attended by 52 people, most of whom are straight Mormons. They go to Rexburg for family gatherings with Jones' parents, who are devout Mormons; the parents were wary at first, but now they accept Yandell and include him in Easter dinner and family photos. Some high-ranking Mormons in Rexburg tell me they also have family members and friends who are gay or lesbian.

Some still feel it necessary to keep their sexual identity in the closet -- especially those who live in Rexburg. John Schroeder sees both the positives and the negatives. He converted to Mormonism at age 24, and was active in the church for more than 20 years, struggling over his sexual identity. He married in a temple, served as a church elder, and finally came out. Now he heads the physicians' assistant program at Idaho State University in Pocatello, and lives in Idaho Falls. He's been with Mike Tyacke, who works for the lab, moving spent nuclear fuel around the world, for seven years. Schroeder says: "Homophobic tripe is preached from the pulpit of every LDS church every Sunday (while) gay people in the congregation don't speak up." But he adds, "In my eight years of being a very 'out' person in Idaho Falls, I've been interviewed on TV and done debates on gay marriage. People come up to me in the grocery store and say, 'I saw you on TV.' No one has ever come up to me and said anything negative. It's easier to be out now than it used to be."

A local lesbian who has a white-collar job, and wishes to keep her name out of this story, says that in recent years, "the gay and lesbian community here has really bonded. We're an inclusive group. If we were in a big city, we could afford to have internal prejudices. Here, we can't afford it."

Many agree that the turning point here occurred eight years ago. It was a court battle between Theron McGriff, who'd come out as gay, and his ex-wife, over custody of their kids. McGriff's case began in 2000, and in 2004 the Idaho Supreme Court created an Idaho landmark: The court ruled that homosexuality can't be used against a parent in a custody argument unless it's clearly detrimental to the children. The court awarded custody to McGriff's ex-wife on other grounds, but these days, McGriff and his partner, an inactive Mormon who spent time in Rexburg, are still involved in raising McGriff's kids. "One thing I learned," McGriff says, "is that a judge can't break up a family."

When McGriff's battle began, he and his friends got the idea of auctioning off many of his possessions to raise money to help cover his lawyer fees and his child-support payments. They formed a group called Breaking Boundaries, and it's grown to be both substantial and mainstream. It promotes many kinds of diversity, raising money through various auctions, beer festivals and other events, and spreading the money around through grants for community projects including after-school programs for schoolkids. Breaking Boundaries' biggest fund-raiser is a black-tie dinner and auction every Christmas season that rakes in tens of thousands of dollars. "It's THE event of the year for this community," one of the organizers, Ron Folsom, tells me. It's even surpassed the Firemen's Ball and the Inventors' Ball in popularity.

Last December, Breaking Boundaries held the fancy dinner in the Idaho Falls Elks Club; 40 volunteers served dinner to 275 people, and they estimate about one-fourth were gay or lesbian. They had an Egyptian theme, and a Mormon dance team from BYU-Idaho performed in Egyptian costumes. They've already sold $42,000 worth of tickets to this year's dinner. It's just one sign of how things are changing, even in Mormon Idaho. Sooner or later, some locals say, gay marriage will be recognized everywhere. They may not say it out loud quite yet, but if you listen carefully, you can hear it between the lines.

This story first appeared on October 22, 2008 in High Country News (www.hcn.org), which covers the West's communities and natural-resource issues. To read the full story click here.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: politics, religion, gay marriage, proposition 8, church of lds

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
RE: I thought CA was all for direct democracy.
Posted by: leTerrassier on Oct 22, 2008 6:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because, as we all know, Bob Barr has always been a strong supporter of democratic action.
What? Oh never mind...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: I thought CA was all for direct democracy.
Posted by: Duncable on Oct 28, 2008 1:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you even know what the word draconian means? If you did, how the hell could ever use it to describe even the slightest of progressive demographics? (ie. the "crowd on the left") Its harsh and severe to treat all people equally?!?

You're a freaking moron...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Intents and Extents
Posted by: talkville on Oct 22, 2008 2:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Mormon mores -- some written into local laws --..."

Then again, there's the Amish in Pennsylvania and their to laws; then again, theres the 'gated communities' and theirs; and there's neighborhoods, there's towns, there's districts, there's any number of unities spread all across the country with human individuals living within -- and others outside of-- them.

And each one of them is in some relationship to "laws" and in another relationship to equalities, and in another relationship to due process, and ....

Then there's codifications such as found in the Bible or the Koran or in some kind of Statement of Principles of Scientologists...etc. etc. etc. Then again there's definitions in various dictionaries.

Then again there are scientific laws; moral laws; local, county, and state laws; there are rights before the law; there are privileges before the law. There is equal protection and un-equal protection.

One wonders: what precisely do the words "household", "family", "due process", "equal protection", and the very word "law" encompass when translated into local, county, state and federalized Law?

What Theocracy shall be imposed in Law? Mormon? Catholic? Buddhist? Jewish? Scientologist? And will all the Non's be Outlaws? For whom will be rights? And for whom will be privileges?

I sure don't know. Maybe we ought to ask the Mormoms some of these questions and more? They seem to have enough money and resources to decide for us all... .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Intents and Extents Posted by: joniab
It is time...
Posted by: EJW on Oct 22, 2008 3:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... to tax churches. When preachers preach politics from the pulpet, be it Morman, Catholic, Jewish, whatever....as they are doing now they are not longer non-taxable. They have crossed the line of separation of Church and State.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It is time... when I disagree? Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: It is time... when I disagree? Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: It is time... Posted by: bryangalt
» AMEN! Posted by: Taylor Siluwe
» RE: It is time... Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: It is time... Posted by: Taylor Siluwe
» RE: It is time... Posted by: joniab
Enduring Values
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Oct 22, 2008 3:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The asymmetry is striking. How would these people react if there were a proposition in California to ban Mormonry? If they don't think people of the same gender should be married, or that people shouldn't drink coffee, they are free to follow their strictures. But they don't have the right to bind those beliefs on other, more rational people.

A few years back God decided that African-Americans really are human after all, and a long time back he decided polygamy really wasn't such a great idea. Maybe he'll change his mind again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: nduring Values Posted by: Lauren
» Nader on the "war on drugs" Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» RE: nduring Values Posted by: Taylor Siluwe
The Moor men Machinaries strike phantasams again!
Posted by: Nightstallion on Oct 22, 2008 4:25 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Listen little Mormon, some of us know your history. Some of us know your true father. His name was Albert Pike; get to know him and his history. Google him up or call the cat a bastard and me a liar. Joseph Smith Jr. and the Latter Day Saint movement had no formal relationship with Freemasonry. In the early 1840s a Masonic Lodge was formed by members who were Freemasons. Joseph Smith, Jr. and his brother Hyrum became members of the newly formed Nauvoo lodge. Nothing unusual about that but, here is where things get dicey for the Church.

Albert Pike was also an unofficial member sort of a mentor for the young Church. Through him the Church began to take on some of the trappings of Free Masonry. On May 4, 1842, just a couple of months after his initiation to Freemasonry, Smith instructed other LDS Church leaders "in the principles of and order of the Priesthood, attending to washings, anointings, endowments, and the communication of keys pertaining to the Aaronic Priesthood, and so onto to the highest order of the Melchizedek Priesthood...." (History of the Church, vol. 5, pg. 1, May 4, 1842).

Still this membership is all well and good, on the surface of the thing. Go any deeper though and you will find some pretty unsavory monsters lurking about the landscape. Pike himself was xenophobic (he didn’t like aliens) oh he covered it well, but the man was a rogue. Amerinds in some teachings were called the lost tribes of Israel, in still other darker texts part of the white man’s burden. These are failings pure and simple of Masonry still and yet today.

My father was a mason. He qualified as a 32nd degree Mason even though his contribution to the Order was unparalleled in the history of Masonry. It was in the form of heavy water gathering. He declared his 33rd degree and was never awarded with recognition. So, yes, I have a grudge!

My claims against Albert Pike as the founding father of Masonry and hidden contributor to the Mormon Church bis none the less true. This Church is built on sand. It looks stable enough to eyes that see only current works. Soon however, even now perhaps, its true nature will out. These folk are warmongers of the first mettle. It is totally alright to kill in the name of Christ by their teachings. I will not trust them to empty chamber pots without hatch plotting against their own people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mikehattan
Posted by: mikehattan on Oct 22, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So they are just passing on the word of God eh?
How come I can't hear him? Beware of people claiming that God is speaking to them...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Michigan's elite has donated large sums to defeat CA Supreme court ruling
Posted by: Beck on Oct 22, 2008 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Elsa Prince, according to the Detroit Free Press, a wealthy Republican who is the mother of Betsy Devos, former Michigan Republican Party Chairman, donated $450,000 to try and overturn the Supreme Court ruling of a state more than 2,000 miles from where she lives. No big government from Republicans, eh? I guess it can't be big enough when they're trying to run other people's lives. I'd love to know how Elsa Prince's own marriage is diminished every time a gay couple marries in California. Here are other donors, from the website of Californians Against Hate:

Knights of Columbus, New Haven, CT $1,275,000

National Organization for Marriage [as long as it's just like mine!],
Princeton, NJ
$941,134.80

John Templeton, Bryn Mawr, PA
John Templeton Foundation, Chairman/President
$900,000


American Family Association, Tupelo, MS
$500,000

Elsa Prince, Holland, MI
$450,000

Focus On the Family, Colorado Springs, CO
$439,643.66

Concerned Women for America, Washington DC
$409,000

For those of us who'd like to help balance out these obscene amounts, here's what I found. Cut and paste this to make an online donation:

https://secure.ga4.org/01/equalityforall

Or we can send a check to:

No On 8
c/o ML Associates, 8581 Santa Monica Blvd., #504
West Hollywood, CA 90069

The website of Californians Against Hate also has some boycott information.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

X pat observer
Posted by: davy on Oct 22, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does religion in America even remotely resembles sanity. Could it be any further from love ??? This applies to "the christians" who use religion for control. Not to you real Christians who try and live love. Do we really think stopping gay marriage is going to save the world. How on earth have you become so deluded ??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Seperation of Church and State For Goodness Sake
Posted by: bryangalt on Oct 22, 2008 5:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What this article has demonstrated is how society does not benefit from the integration of Church and State laws and business. I cannot understand how the religious groups out there find it so difficult to see the hypocracy in their words and actions.

I agree with a viewpoint mentioned a few writers ago who ask how would the Mormon's feel if Prop 8 was banning them in California? That's a good question and one that may come to a vote someday after some other religious nut gets their anti-religious views on the ballot.

If Prop 8 passes thanks to the outright lies being stated by the church groups (Fresno Bee Editorial: The claims being made for Prop 8 are outright lies: 10-19-08), then I think it should be time for the churches to see what it feels like to be persecuted in this manner.

Those churches that participated by actively raising money to pass the proposition have violated the seperation clause of the Constitution and violated federal IRS codes. They should not be given a free pass on this.

I wonder what Jesus would say about their narrow interpretations of the Bible? Would he be someone that would be trying to prevent his people from living a life of dignity, a life of love and a life with another that they love?

If a gay couple get married and never divorce, are they still more of a sinner than a straight couple that cheat on each other and get divorced (maybe divorced multiple times?). I'm willing to bet that anyone can find many admonitions against adultery in the Bible, and even some adulterers who ended up getting killed over it.

Other than the dubious tale of S/G where the population is alleged to have been killed for attempting to rape two angels (interestingly, it is never said that the rapists were gay, just that they were out-of-control, which any mob can become out of control regardless of sexual orientation), where else is an individual stoned to death for being gay?

Frankly, if people want to believe that they are going to be raptured (odds: 1:100,000,000), or that they are better than their fellow man, then they are just stupid and they should keep that stupidity inside the walls of their church.

I promise that you will not have to hear me preach to you as long as you promise not to preach to me. Isn't that what freedom from/of religion (the 1st amendment) was really about?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It seems that money is very important in these relgious
Posted by: peridot on Oct 22, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
crusades....why not list some Mormon business enterprises that can be boycotted?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ironic Posted by: Karina
Who cares
Posted by: RedFoxOne on Oct 22, 2008 6:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL, we are talking about a cult here that wrote their own "addition" to the Bible, who cares what those lunatics think!

Jiff
Privacy Center

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who cares Posted by: helenwheels
» I care... Posted by: BreeMass
» RE: Who cares Posted by: sirios
THERE'S A SIMPLE SOLUTION
Posted by: Liberty G on Oct 22, 2008 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is so sad to read and hear the angry, hateful comments on both sides of this issue. Worse, there is a simple solution that would be fair to all, and could end the government involvement in the controversy.

It is the government's proper role to grant LEGAL rights to all citizens equally. Marriage is a complex institution, often, though not always, deeply involved with religious beliefs.

Therefore, the government should stop marrying people, period. Couples, gay or straight, should be able to come to a registry office to declare their legal domestic partnership and thus receive all the rights now attached to the word, "marriage". Then, the couples could proceed with whatever religious or civil ceremonies that met their needs.

"Separation of church and state" is, I think, a misstatement of the founders' intent. The point really is that the government should never IMPOSE ANY RELIGION on anyone. The "gay marriage" issue is a perfect example of where the government should get out of the way and grant the freedom to all to practice their religion or lack of one as they feel moved.

Unfortunately, many on both sides are determined to have the government force their partisan views onto all citizens as a matter of law. However, providing equality of legal and economic rights is the only legitimate government interest - not defining the meaning and nature of marriage for all of us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: THERE'S A SIMPLE SOLUTION Posted by: tyndale25
Where are the so-called "libertarians" when you need them on matters such as these?
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 22, 2008 7:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, right, I forgot. They're busy kissing Wall $treet's ASS. Notice that Bob Barr is rather silent on civil liberties. As a matter of fact, the entire Libertarian Party says little about it or even the failed war in Iraq. If the Libertarians really want to win, they should spend more time teaming up against the social "conservatives" for a change.

And by the way, Mormons are for same sex marriage given their polygamist ways. If one man is married to more than one woman, then that alone opens the door to same sex marriage. What the fuck is the Utah Democratic Party doing these days anyway? Or for that matter the so-called "Libertarians" in CA and UT for that matter?

And don't forget that what affects same sex couples will also affect singles (men and women). You've been warned.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mormon History....
Posted by: CatDad on Oct 22, 2008 8:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mormons didn't end up in the Salt Lake Valley because they happened to think it was scenic....they were beaten and even slaughtered for being "different" and had to flee thousands of miles for safety. Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, was a living re-definition of the institution of marriage.

Fast forward some 150 years and the oppressed have become the oppressors, attacking those they deem "different" while censoring their own history away in the process...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mormon History.... Posted by: morticia
» RE: Mormon History.... Posted by: BreeMass
» RE: Mormon History.... Posted by: Quannah
Dear morons and other religious fanatics,
Posted by: sirios on Oct 22, 2008 8:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is your religion and your attachment to it so delicate that what gay people do a thousand miles away will destroy you and your beliefs ? If your religion is based on an omnipotent, omnipresent,and omniscient being then how is it possible that a tiny mortal being can threaten your infinite wisdom? If you feel threatened by anything, then what you perceive yourself to be is an illusion. Life at it's core is unmovable. shift your attention off of the ego and it's parts and into the whole in which it appears,and then no amount of remote behavior which your tiny personality may find offensive will be a threat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When do the Mormon Moral Cops hit the street
Posted by: corgyn on Oct 22, 2008 9:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read this thing and all I can see is the similarities to IRANIAN type society. They TELL you what to wear, read, view, eat, drink, suppress sex, "sure ain't no homos around here" attitude, just like IRAN.

The ONLY way to stop the various religions is to TAX them, end the free ride!

And turn off the LIGHTS your temples are ruining the night sky

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Does this article wake anyone up?
Posted by: Bliss Doubt on Oct 22, 2008 9:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
McSame and O'Same want to give taxpayer money to churches with the same "faith based" scam.

www.votenader.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

why do you think its called the moron church??...
Posted by: Annapurna1 on Oct 22, 2008 10:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
duh...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ironic
Posted by: amerimet on Oct 22, 2008 10:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They should work with same sex rights advocates, so they could restore their right to wed multiple partners.

Long live freedom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

campaign contrubitions
Posted by: sanity on Oct 22, 2008 10:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is time we have a new Constitutional Amendment. Only individuals eligible and registered to vote in the election of a government official or ballot initiative may contribute money for or against it's cause. I'm sick of out-of-state and out-of-district interests interfering in my elections and I'm sick of solicitations to support a candidate or cause that is in another jurisdiction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Modest Suggestion
Posted by: Crazy H on Oct 22, 2008 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Religious Wrong is big on talking about 'civil unions' and have repeatedly told us that it's the same thing as marriage.

Okay, I vote that everywhere the word "marriage" exists in state or federal law, it be struck from the record and replaced with "civil union." Furthermore, the state shall no longer issue "marriage licenses" but rather "civil union licenses."

Who's with me?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I am! Posted by: BreeMass
Lucky me...
Posted by: NoKidding on Oct 22, 2008 11:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I live right next door to a Mormon Temple here in So. Cal. I think it's interesting that my No on 8 signs disappear at random times of the day and night. Most of their cars have Yes on 8 bumper stickers

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lucky me... Posted by: aalif ba ta tha
"Marriage" vs. "Christian"
Posted by: jdonovan on Oct 22, 2008 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Under California law, gay couples may have civil unions with all the rights of a "marriage," so all this proposed ban decides is whether gays can call those unions "marriage." And it's mainly Christian organizations that are pushing to limit the definition of marriage to one-man-one-woman.

For the government to weigh in on what people are allowed to call legally indistinguishable institutions is an utter violation of the First Amendment, regardless of who gets offended. Otherwise the government could just as easily decree that Mormons aren't allowed to call themselves "Christians." Obviously limiting the rights of a religious group to refer to their religion as a Christian sect violates freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Sure it might be inconvenient for the majority of Christians to acknowledge the Book of Mormon as a Christian text. And sure, the subject of Mormonism might come up in a school discussion about Christianity, for any impressionable kid to think about. SO WHAT? That's how America works. We live side by side with people who think and act differently from us, and we can choose to have any opinion we want of those people. We just aren't allowed to infringe on their rights!

So if Mormons enjoy being able to call themselves Christian, they should think twice before trying to stop gay couples from calling themselves married!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Marriage" vs. "Christian" Posted by: jdonovan
Mormonism is way more perverted than gay marriage
Posted by: aalif ba ta tha on Oct 22, 2008 12:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just like dropping bombs on innocents is way more perverted than gay marriage. Just like lying to America to send our boys to die in a war for oil is more perverted than two dudes getting married.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Civil/Human Rights Should NOT Be Up For A Vote!
Posted by: maddasein on Oct 22, 2008 12:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine what it would have been like if civil rights for African Americans had been up for vote back in the 60's! This issue makes me so angry....especially being a gay person myself. I live in Kentucky so I doubt that my partner and I will ever see marriage legalized here, but it gave me hope seeing other states legalize it. We were even planning on traveling to Cali next year to get married. I just can't believe that religious nuts think that by letting committed couples have legal protections then all hetero marriages would somehow fall apart or become null and void. If you don't like gay marriage then don't get married to someone of the same sex, damn it! It really is sick how these people are just so obesessed with sex. It's like when they think about homosexuals all they see is the sex they have and not the fact that we are human beings. I honestly don't think that most so-called christians even understand Jesus and his teachings. I mean, I am an atheist and am more christian than most who called themselves such.

Oh, and more one thing.... I want to quit hearing about tolerance! I don't want people to merely tolerate me. I want people to accept me!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If we were to take away the Tax Exempt Status of this so-called Church...
Posted by: Quannah on Oct 22, 2008 12:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and list the reason being their dabbling in politics, they would stop.

In the late 1970s, the Federal Government threatened to take away their tax exempt status because they discriminated against black men by not allowing them to hold the Priesthood in their church. The Feds told them that if they continued to discriminate, they would have to start paying taxes.

Miracle of Miracles! The President of their Church had a "Revelation" from God telling them that all men were now eligible to hold the Priesthood!!!

They need another "Revelation!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Union Relationships, are Sometimes Taking Place, by Statement, signed by a Notary...
Posted by: One American Lady on Oct 22, 2008 12:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These Statements, can Read Anyway, any Individual / Couple or Family, Wish Them to Say,About Any Subject, They Wish to "State as the Truth".
Many States, "Recognize Common Law Marriages, & so does the Dept of Veterans Affairs", for
U.S. Military Veterans, who wish "not to marry,
but have a Live-In Spouse.... & they, oftentimes, have a Notorized Statement, that They Are "living together AS *JOINT SPOUSE RELATIONSHIP*.
When Anyone Makes a Statement & signs it "Before a Notary, it is Supposed to Be A Statement of Truth", legal document, one which can be filed at the court house... a legal union, which then "takes a divorce, to dissolve, / a legal document of dissolution",
one which can be / doesn't have to be signed by a judge.
One American Lady

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ring my bell
Posted by: Jim V. on Oct 22, 2008 1:09 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can we not send the Mormons to Iraq to fight the holy war seeing that there's 10 and up siblings to family as they are well equip to go from door to door one will hardly be missed if shot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why oh why!!
Posted by: barefeet on Oct 22, 2008 2:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This obsession of ours with stamping out homosexuality and abortion by passing laws against them is simply brain dead.

We should simply walk away yawning instead of endlessly ranting and considering legislation that simply WON'T AND CAN'T be enforced.

The only comparable ambiguity is our depraved obsession with killing foreign innocents at the same time that we think it's "wrong" to execute our own CERTIFIED GUILTY horrifically bad people.

Just goes to show that you can send your kid to college but that is not going to make him or her smart. Dumb people are born dumb and stay that way forever.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Height of Hypocracy
Posted by: Rosasharn on Oct 22, 2008 3:38 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now, it's perfectly okay for those edgy Latter Day 'Saints' to have MULTIPLE WIVES, why it's even quite acceptable to marry your first cousin, especially if she's underage! And absolutely marry your teenage daughter off to the oldest man in your community, cause, shucks , he needs ta be married to her young self as well as her mother AND sisters, too. Why, it's all perfectly natural, dontcha think?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who's a Prophet--Who's Schizo?
Posted by: zooeyhall on Oct 22, 2008 4:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it that if god talks to Joseph Smith, it makes him a prophet. But if god talks to me it would make me a schizophrenic?

I can tell you one thing after reading an article like this--I am REALLY glad I'm a secular humanist!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who's a Prophet--Who's Schizo? Posted by: philipcfromnyc
The "OTHER" side of Rexburg
Posted by: rickiey on Oct 22, 2008 7:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, this is merely personal experience speaking, as a man who was a young male who likes women (and men, but that isn't relevent to this point) and who spent time living in Idaho Falls.

Rexburg is the easiest town to get laid in, in America.

Why? Rick's college, where all the nice young mormon girls (that can't get into BYU) finally get their first taste of life somewhere other than under their parent's thumb.

How is that relevent? Beats me, I just felt like sharing, since they mentioned Rexburg. :P

Anyway, back on topic. I'm going to have to admit that of all loonies who believe in Christianity, I'm the most partial to Mormons. (No, not for that reason).

I truly believe, that the Mormon's who are trying to ban gay marriage, are doing it because they think it is the right thing to do. They are trying to save us from sin.

They don't care that we don't believe sin exists. They don't care that we don't believe their god exists. They don't care that the are trying to force their morals on others. They want to "fix" people who don't subscribe to their moral standards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evil rears its ugly head yet again...
Posted by: philipcfromnyc on Oct 22, 2008 9:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe that this universe was created by a higher power; however, I emphatically and unequivocally reject the very concept of organized religion, for reasons which are easy to identify. It is not any particular religion that I reject; it is the concept of organized religion itself that I consider to be the hallmark of a diseased society. It is when men and women act in accordance with religious dogma that they most happily destroy the lives of others; of those who do not see the world through the lens of a pre-determined belief system.

Religion is, for want of a better word, evil.

An intelligent person will inevitably question his or her place in the world, and will inevitably think about difficult and painful issues. Religion holds out a panacea; it removes from people the need to contemplate the meaning of such issues by offering up a predigested set of rules and promises. Religion helps those people who are either incapable of thinking for themselves, or who are unwilling to think for themselves. This is a cold reality.

Unfortunately, those who subscribe to religious beliefs all too often believe it necessary to "enlighten" their fellow human beings -- by forcing their religious beliefs on people who neither share them nor wish to share them. It is this -- it is the need that people feel (either drummed into them by their religion, or the product of genuine personal zeal) to "share" their religious beliefs with others -- that fuels the worst pogroms; that drives armies to attack each other; that compels school boards to rob children of gay-themed books; and that causes people to advocate changing state constitutions to destroy gay marriages.

This need that people have -- this need for answers without hard work -- manifests itself in literally every society known to history. When "conventional" religion fails, for whatever reason, to provide people with the answers that they crave, new religions are created out of whole cloth (Scientology comes to mind immediately). Clever people soon realize that they can become rich by promoting answers to questions that have not even been asked (yet); and a new religion is created to pander to this need.

The Mormons are determined to change the broader society in which we all live, so as to inscribe their policy preferences into the law of the land. The Framers of the US Constitution were wise enough to foresee this eventuality, and they did what they could to ensure that religion would not drive the crafting of law and public policy. Sadly, there are limits to their success – limits which reflect the nature of humanity itself. When the Hawaii Supreme Court held that the Hawaii constitution prohibited the state from denying marriage to gay couples, the Mormons poured literally millions of dollars into that state, to fuel and channel their hatred of gay people. Make no mistake – many Americans hate their gay fellow citizens. The depths of this hatred are difficult for me, as an activist for gay equality, to convey to those heterosexual people who are not, themselves, contaminated by this hatred. The Mormons succeeded in amending the Hawaii state constitution to deny gay couples the right to marry. Now they seek to amend the constitution of another state, to deny gay couples the right to marry in that state too.

We are trained to respect the religious beliefs of others. Unfortunately, this all too often leads to self-censorship; we don’t say what we really feel, for fear of being perceived and labelled as religious bigots. The cold truth is that it is nothing less than evil to deny to gay couples the rights and privileges that heterosexual couples take for granted. It is nothing less than evil to deprive gay persons of the support that comes from being married to another person...

(Continued...)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evil rears its ugly head yet again...
Posted by: philipcfromnyc on Oct 22, 2008 9:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the California Supreme Court noted, many gay couples raise children. This will remain true regardless of the outcome of the attempt to amend the California state constitution. Allowing gay couples to marry will benefit such children immeasurably, by stabilizing the parent-child relationships that such children form, with both their biological parents and their non-biological parents. Allowing gay couples to marry will ensure that children raised by such couples will have access to health insurance (in those cases where a partner and children are insured by his or her spouse’s employer). Allowing gay couples to marry will normalize parent-child relationships in the eyes of other children. Allowing gay couples to marry expands the protective ambit of this social institution.

The Mormons poured money into efforts to amend the Massachusetts state constitution to outlaw gay marriages. They failed in Massachusetts, and this issue cannot be voted on again in Massachusetts until 2012. Now they have targeted California, and are pouring literally millions of dollars into the effort to destroy gay marriages in that state. Their behaviour is evil – and it should be described as such, unapologetically and unequivocally. Their behaviour is fuelled by their hatred of gay persons. I am pessimistic, and believe that we will probably lose the right to marry in California – just six months after being granted this right by a state high court that was not afraid to call this issue as it saw it. However, there is nothing that these forces of hatred can do to undermine, or reverse, a key holding arrived at by this court. The California Supreme Court became the second state supreme court to hold that gay persons comprise a “suspect class” for the purposes of equal protection analysis (the Hawaii Supreme Court arrived at the same conclusion by making reference to the explicit language of the framers of the state constitution; this went largely unnoticed by the legal community, because this conclusion was stated in a footnote to the final opinion, holding that the change to the state constitution had rendered the issue moot). This California high court held that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is as disgusting and as cruel as discrimination on the basis of race. This holding will survive regardless of the outcome of the proposed amendment.

We also won an important victory in Connecticut on October 10, when the Connecticut Supreme Court, in an analytically rich decision, held that the equal protection provisions of the Connecticut constitution prohibited the state from denying marriage licenses to gay couples. The governor has stated that she will abide by this ruling, and does not intend to call for a constitutional convention (the Connecticut constitution cannot be changed by direct voter input, as is possible in California). The Connecticut Supreme Court held that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is as disgusting and unacceptable as discrimination on the basis of gender, holding that gay persons comprise a “quasi-suspect class” for the purposes of equal protection analysis.

What the Mormons are doing in California is evil – and should be called such. All that I can do is hope that they will fail. Furthermore, we should not allow a loss in California to slow us down or to dampen our spirits. If we lose in California, we should immediately set about gathering signatures to certify a proposed amendment that would nullify this loss, to be voted on as soon as the law permits.

Fortunately, the trend is on our side. Norway became the latest country to legalize gay marriage a few months ago.

In time, gay marriage will become legal throughout the US.


PHILIP CHANDLER

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's Happening With...
Posted by: Lily H. on Oct 22, 2008 11:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the all-exclusive Catholic town, Ave Maria in Florida
by Tom Monahan??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Happening Now
Posted by: atchemp on Oct 23, 2008 4:37 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The True Issues as stake –

1. California school children will be taught that same-sex marriage is interchangeable, acceptable, and condoned starting in Kindergarten, unless Prop 8 passes.
a. Evidence – Grade school children in Massachusetts are taught that a boy can marry a boy and a girl can marry a girl. The courts ruled that parents cannot object to these teachings.
b. Evidence - October 11: In the same week that the “No on 8” campaign launched an ad that labeled as “lies” claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. The San Francisco Chronicle reporter said she did not know if the school had ever sponsored a field trip for students to a traditional wedding.

2. Faith or religious bases groups will be forced to accept same-sex marriages or face multiple lawsuits and potentially loose tax-exempt status.
a. Evidence - Catholic charities in Massachusetts abandoned their adoption service for hard-to-place children when it was ordered to place children in same-sex households.
b. Evidence – The multiple lawsuits against The Boy Scouts of America, for refusing to accept gay troop leaders. All federal support of this long time American association was revoked. The plaintiffs tried also to revoke the tax-exempt status of the BSA, claiming that it is equivalent to federal aid.
c. Evidence - Christian secondary schools like Cole Valley Christian and Nampa Christian have been sued for expelling lesbian students.
d. Evidence – A same-sex couple was turned down by a Methodist retreat center, the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association in New Jersey, when they sought to rent it for a same-sex ceremony. The center declined to allow the site to be rented for that purpose, on the grounds that the center had a “strongly held religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman,” according to the center’s director. The lesbian couple filed a complaint with New Jersey’s Division of Civil Rights, and won, no matter that the center is a religiously-based operation with First Amendment rights to the free exercise of religion and association with possessed private property rights as well.
e. Evidence – A Jewish university was ordered to allow same-sex couples into its married dormitory

3. Individuals will be forced by law to accept and condone same-sex marriages despite their religious beliefs.
a. Evidence - A psychologist in Mississippi lost her case when she was sued for refusing to counsel a lesbian who was not interested in reparative therapy, and a California doctor is about to lose his case for declining to provide in-vitro fertilization services to a lesbian.
b. Evidence – A wedding photographer in New Mexico has been fined almost $6,700, for declining to photograph a same-sex ceremony on the basis of religious belief.

The state of California has been very tolerant of people with same-sex attraction. Such individuals can obtain a civil union which grants all of the advantages that a married couple has to same-sex couples. Proposition 8 is not anti-gay and would not remove and of the advantages or rights enjoyed by same-sex couples under the law. A yes vote on proposition 8 is being called intolerant, however tolerance works both ways.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Happening Now Posted by: sanity
» RE: Happening Now Posted by: atchemp
» RE: Happening Now Posted by: sanity
» RE: Happening Now Posted by: TheNamelessCity
» RE: Happening Now Posted by: VMRH
Delusional
Posted by: tyndale25 on Nov 1, 2008 7:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We often fear what we do not understand. This article heaps ignorance upon ignorance and clamors to the lowest common denominator. We thus feed our frenzy to maintain our bias and thereby become the delusional ones. We would do well to seek to understand this religion rather than to increase our inept prejudice.

Perhaps we can get hold of our paranoia and instead thank the Mormons for stepping up and helping us in the fight against gay marriage. Is that below us? Any and all who value true marriage between a man and a woman, the kind of lasting bond that creates within a home a refuge from the storm of decadence around us should thank the Mormons for stepping up. With all the support the vote NO campaign has from school boards, movie stars and corporations, God be thanked that our Mormon friends have come to our aid, or perhaps the Mormons are to be thanked themselves.

How many of us would step up like they have and give money and time to help pass this important amendment? How many of us have? Mormons were not commanded to support it. Good grief. You live a sheltered life if you believe that. I for one am most grateful to the Mormons and to their insightful leadership. What did you call them? Prophets? Is that as in one who sees afar off? Maybe that is the case, but whatever the case, they have my thanks. How about yours?

Any religious person who understands their Bible, or their Koran, or their Talmud, or their Book of Mormon will side with the Mormons on this one. Thank you to all who use their right to vote to enact an amendment that protects marriage and at the same time, allows gay and lesbian couples to enjoy the same benefits within the framework of the law and the IRS code, but outside of the forced acceptance of religious organizations. Thank you also to those who vote against it. At least you are following your conscience. Isn't that what freedom is all about!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keeping the Traditional Definition of Marriage is Good for Society
Posted by: sjhonda on Nov 5, 2008 12:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Society has an interest in promoting children having a mother and a father. Marriage is the way a Mother and Father are bound together legally with their child. All insitutions have their standards that allow them to perform their function. One of the main purposes of marriage is to give children an opportunity to have a loving mother and father.

All institutions have their standards. Football teams, educational insitutions, the Military. These standards help the institution meet their objectives. Just saying I want in - is no reason to change the standard. Marriage is about providing children with a mother and a father. When a child loses a mother or father through abandonment, or death, we rightly call it a tragedy. Likewise a child never having a Mother or a Father because society decided that 2 men were as good at raising a child as a mother and a father is a tradgedy. Which in the raising of a child is not needed, the mother or the father?

Those who are single and raise good children do an "exceptional" job. Unfortunately too often it is an exception. But on a whole a child missing a mother or a father is more likely to engage in drug addictions, crime, and be poor.

Thank goodness Californian's had enough sense to think of the good of their children.

Of course traditional families are imperfect- people are imperfect. But just because the traditional families garden has a few weeds doesn't mean we abandon it's definition and say one of the geneders of teh parents is irrelevant.

A child who had a mother and father who loved each and them have a great gift. Making sure that the definition of Marriage is between a man and a woman will make sure that society promotes this standard and encourages more optimum child rearing homes to be available to children.

And yes it is optimal. A man cannot be a mother. A woman cannot be a father. Two men can't even create the child so vital to society's future. One man one woman - Marriage -- Best for children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those darn christians...
Posted by: DenmarkMike on Nov 5, 2008 4:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look guys, as closed minded as it may seem, if you are a Christian in the World today there is no way you could vote no to Prop 8. I am a practicing Christian and I am one of those crazy fanatics who voted yes to Prop 8. Simply put, Jesus would have voted yes to Prop 8, the founding fathers would have voted yes, and Martin Luther King Jr would have voted yes. It is an obvious fact. Now I will say that you can argue so many things against this movement to ban gay marriage but the facts are the Bible says homosexuality is a sin. Love the sinner, hate the sin. We love everybody but I will never ever step aside and allow the government (I say government becuase the people voted against gay marriage in 2000, but liberal judges felt that that wasnt good enough) allow sin. Sorry, call me close minded but if there are any Christians who voted no to Prop 8, REPENT!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement