Posts Tagged LDS church
You can always count on the Deseret News to the print the stupidest letters one can imagine.
Kids need both mom and dad
It is fascinating that in the name of tolerance and love anyone not accepting the homosexual political agenda is hated and smeared. However, that doesn’t change the facts.
Marriage is, at base, a method for raising children. Research now overwhelmingly bears out what common sense has told us: Children grow up best in the homes of two parents of opposite sexes — preferably their own parents.
In Europe, where homosexual “marriage” is legal, the rate of children being raised in two-parent homes is sliding drastically because people are not marrying. Is giving a few self-indulgent adults “warm fuzzies” worth the price to the millions of children who will lose what they need most, a mother and a father?
Richard Coxson, Spanish Fork
Were it not for the stupidity of this letter, The Deseret New might have had room for THREE letters about socialism.
You can see from my previous diaries that I have been all over the issue of Mormon donations to Prop 8. But just now, something positively devastating just fell into my lap. And my source says there’s a lot more where this came from.
I have received an internal memo from the Mormon Church dated March 4, 1997. This memo discusses strategies for what the memo calls "HLM" (gay marriage) in Hawaii and California (I assume that HLM refers to "homosexual legal marriage" but if you have your own preferred acronym, feel free to use it).
Like I said–this memo is devastating. And it demonstrates that they have been planning this Proposition 8 referendum for more than a decade.
Above is the first page of this memo. It indicates, as you see, that the Mormon Church had been planning to coordinate with the Catholic Church to defeat “HLM” in Hawaii and California. Below are images of devastating quotes from this memo.
This memo overtly discusses strategy for making sure that “HLM” doesn’t make any more progress than it absolutely has to:
In 2000 the citizens of California overwhelmingly (61%) voted to affirm the traditional definition of marriage, the common definition of marriage that had prevailed since the founding of the state and the definition that has prevailed until recently in virtually every society around the world. What evolved thereafter was a live and let live solution where domestic partners had de facto civil unions and every right that the state could grant without redefining marriage. Homosexual couples, unlike blacks, prosper economically more than heterosexual couples, and the homosexual lobby is arguably the most powerful force in California politics. The California Supreme Court’s recent 4-3 decision, however, added two additional rights: the right to stigmatize or sue anyone who publicly disagreed with the new legal definition of marriage and right to sue for the new definition of marriage in other states based on the full faith and credit clause of the constitution.
Despite attempts to have it barred from the ballot, Proposition 8 allows the citizens of California the opportunity to re-establish the traditional definition of marriage. The opponents of Proposition 8, however, have defined a yes vote as a vote for intolerance and the state government and media have framed Proposition 8 in a most negative light.
Tolerance, however, runs both directions. The person who ripped off my “Democrats for Proposition 8” bumper sticker was not very tolerant. The people who have stolen Pro Prop 8 yards signs have not shown their tolerance. The people who on blogs assert that opposition to Proposition 8 can only stem from hatred and fail to acknowledge that there can be any legitimate arguments on the other side do not strike me as tolerant.
The latest tactic is to make Proposition 8 a referendum on the Mormon Church, betting that linking Prop 8 to a religious minority is a winning tactic. The tactic may work, but the Latter-day Saints are not alone in opposition Proposition 8. See, for example, this link or this one from the Orthodox Union, which seems a model of reasoned tolerance.