Quick question re: Prop 8
 

As this is a message board anybody can chime in, but my question is directed mainly towards temple recommend holders (those who sustain the prophet and apostles as prophets, seers and revelators).

Also, I apologize if this has been brought up in other threads or posts - if it has, I missed it and still want to know.

On this prop 8 issue, if I were in CA, I would definitely lean towards a no on 8 vote.

My dilemma...President Monson, his counselors and the Quorum of the Twelve are obviously very serious about this issue. They are telling church members to not only vote yes on 8, but go out of their way to support yes on 8.

If President Monson and the other 14 prophets, seers and revelators feel so strongly that Californians should vote yes on prop 8, is it possible that they are telling us God's will on this issue? And consequently, a no on prop 8 vote is in opposition to the will of God?

I honestly don't know what to think as my personal inclination would be to vote no on 8. But if God, knowing all things, wants me to vote yes, I think I would have to side with Him.

I'll be honest, my question is mainly directed toward PAC and DDD as they are probably the only two CG members who I'm confident hold TRs and are voting no on 8.

I am not one of your selected targets, but can I just say that this has been hashed and re-hashed quite a few times here and I, for one, am pretty gassed talking about and thinking about prop 8. I cannot wait for the election to arrive so this is over.

I am not sure if I recall either PAC or Triple actualy saying either would vote no on prop 8. Triple seems to take that position, but PAC"s seems to be a little more nuanced. It wouldnt' suyrprise me if they did, but I am not sure you shoudl assume either will, unless I missed the statement, which given all the prop 8 threads I very well might have done.

I'm just looking opinions of those who are in a similar position I would be in if I were in CA. Thankfully, I'm not there so I don't really have to worry.

My concern really would come to down to being as simple as not wanting to support something that is contrary to God's will. But would a vote for or support for no on 8 be contrary to God's will? I don't know. I guess that's a decision for those in CA to make.

This is a very touchy issue obviously, since No-Voters don't want to be made out to be opposing God. Most that I know feel that the prophets, seers, and revelators are just plain wrong on this. Even if they oppose homosexual behavior, they feel like the church is going about it the wrong way.

Personally, I have a hard time reconciling that with their call. Has a single 70 in any of the 6 quorums come out and opposed this? We have Lebowski's word that at least one and likely more were privately opposed. I wonder how those men will ultimately vote.

I must say, I would love to hear an argument about how Monson, etc., are wrong that doesn't invoke 1978.

Well, the statements of the first presidency are on-line and you can read what they wrote to all members in CA. It is then up to each member to decide what they think it all means.

No, my story was about the BSA case a few years back. Not prop 8.

And if any are privately opposed, of course they aren't going to make a public statement in opposition.

Sorry, I was under the impression you meant it on the issue of homosexuality generally.

I know. I was asking the question semi-rhetorically to make a point.

SMR, I will keep it brief because the gibbon is correct, this has been beaten to death and now we all need to move on to more important topics, like Steve Young's lawn decorations.

As for your question.....

I do not support Prop 8.

I understand the Church's position and respect it. I am in disagreement about how the Church is going about it. I also find it curious that there have been no similar mass efforts regarding similar current measures on ballots in states like Arizona.

As far as reconciling, it is pretty simple. I believe the Gospel to be true, the Church to be true. I love the Church. But I think that on this issue, we are getting it wrong. Some here dismiss the policy shift of 1978, I don't. Women only being allowed to pray in sac meeting. Polygamy. Etc. We are a Church that evolves. I feel like this may be one of those issues that evolves. It may not be, and I concede that.

If I am wrong, then I will suffer the consequences of my decisions. Plain and simple. I believe that we will be accountable for our decisions and this is my decision. I also believe I will be no more accountable than for any of the other mistakes I have made in my life. This won't be the first time and it won't be the last.

Not sure that answers your question. If not, let me know.

Thanks for the response. That does answer the question, and if I were in CA, I very well might make the same decision you are making. I honestly don't know what I would do.

Tex needs a personal introduction to a man with whom he surely shares much in common: D. Michael Quinn!