Was Prop 8 a diversion?
 

Was Prop 8 which surprisingly passed a diversion from similar measures in Arizona and Florida?

How so? Theirs failed also, and so did the measure in Arkansas to allow gay couples to adopt.

Am I reading the results wrong?

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/res...llot.measures/

The measure in Florida banning gay marriage passed resoundedly, and it passed in Arizona.

Was Prop 8 deemed a sacrifice so that the national funds wouldn't be available to fight the other ones?

I think you are reading them wrong. They didn't vote to allow gay marriage, they voted to ban it.

Arizona:
Should the state ban gay marriage?
Majority: YES

California:
Should the state ban gay marriage?
Majority: YES

Florida:
Should the state ban gay marriage?
Majority: YES

You're not understanding me.

Was the Prop 8 a diversion to ensure passages of other bans?

I maintain that the folks in SLC know that eventually marriage will be for all sexual preferences (go Tri Lambda!), but yet they chose to unleash the organization and financial power of the LDS Church. I maintain it was a statement to the world of where the LDS Church stands. I still am not an advocate of the Church getting involved in politics to that extent and I don't like some of the fallout, but I don't blame the Church for that. Regardless, one must admire and respect the organizational clout of the LDS Church.

What bothers me the most is the self-aggrandizement nature of those who consider themselves the wheat amidst the tares when they were able to get behind an issue they would have gotten behind regardless.

Well I don't like seeing the Church lose, and I thought it was a losing proposition. Don't use your clout for losses, unless you also win.

Win, baby, win.

For one, the church has more members in California and therefore a greater chance to affect the election.

For another, California is the bigger fish. "As California goes, so goes the nation."

California is rad!

Your avatar tells us otherwise.