Monson: Gay Marriage Fight in CA 'Is Our Gettysburg'

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

Dude, speaking of whiffs.... I enjoy a lot of what you write, but then you tee it up, and with a mighty swing, write crap like "the LDS Church is always wrong" and "is bad for marriage." Such pronouncements then remind of your mad skills at predicting BYU's and Utah's future athletic fortunes, where your track record is Harold Stassen-like, and ultimately, your work is moved from the category of "profound" to merely "entertaining."

Context, my friend. We are talking in this thread about its ultra-social conservativism. It is always wrong when it expresses that.

I was being ironic when I said it is bad for marriage. Though I do believe that the LDS church has been bad for some marriages. Can you deny that? For one thing, Waters plans to divorce if gay marriage is legalized in Texas to help the LDS Church prove its point. Seriously, though, what if one parent wants to accept a gay child and another doesn't because of the church? What if a husband wants his wife to not pursue a career she loves because of the church? What if the Church causes someone to marry too young? This is all bad for marriage.

I could spin endless scenarios where the LDS church's ultra social conservativism stresses families and therefore marriages.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Also, if gay marriage is legalized, you can still teach your children that it is wrong.....see also: abortion, alcohol, fornication, cigarettes, going to the store on Sunday, profanity, and a host of other things.

This is the problem I'm wrestling with. Of the specific items you listed, I regard only Sunday shopping (hey, I had to go buy bread when the teachers forgot to bring it--I''m talking to YOU Jimmy Patten) and profanity (without which playing golf with BYU71 would be like spending four hours conversing with Marcel Marceau), as being potentially more harmful to me and my marriage than a couple of guys or ladies getting hitched. The Church is not even suggesting, much less campagining for, such things to be outlawed. So I'm waiting for a cogent argument as to why gay marriage is so much worse.

I'm receptive to the "because the Prophet said so" argument, but I'd feel much more comfortable if I heard a strong logical defense to go with it.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

SU's main job on this board is to dull and twist my message.

How many times have I had to restate your message? How many of my posts have begun, "What Waters is trying to say..." Never any quibble from you.

Here's the deal. I restate your message with terrible clarity and directness. I say what you mean but can't really say, having isntead to resort to stuff like ironies.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Context, my friend. We are talking in this thread about its ultra-social conservativism. It is always wrong when it expresses that.

I was being ironic when I said it is bad for marriage. Though I do believe that the LDS church has been bad for some marriages. Can you deny that? For one thing, Waters plans to divorce if gay marriage is legalized in Texas to help the LDS Church prove its point. Seriously, though, what if one parent wants to accept a gay child and another doesn't because of the church? What if a husband wants his wife to not pursue a career she loves because of the church? What if the Church causes someone to marry too young? This is all bad for marriage.

I could spin endless scenarios where the LDS church's ultra social conservativism stresses families and therefore marriages.

What does any of this have to do with the church? You're talking about routine marital selfishness. One can obsess about any behavior or ideal and thus destroy one's marriage, not just those espoused by the LDS faith.

[Indy Coug]

I post this for your perusal. I have yet to read it myself.

http://www.princetonprinciples.org/contents.html

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Also, if gay marriage is legalized, you can still teach your children that it is wrong.....see also: abortion, alcohol, fornication, cigarettes, going to the store on Sunday, profanity, and a host of other things. What would prevent you from doing this? Why would social support for our teachings break down? Is everyone but the Mormons going to magically support gay marriage once it becomes legal?

More terrible analogies.

Moreover, once it's isntitutionalized, try teaching them it's wrong. See what kind of a conundrum you find yourself in. Your child's best friend has gay parents. You teach your child gay marriage is wrong? Yeah, right. I bet you don't stand in the concourse outside the Lakers game and yap that gay lifestyle or gay marriage is "wrong."

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Tex

What does any of this have to do with the church? You're talking about routine marital selfishness. One can obsess about any behavior or ideal and thus destroy one's marriage, not just those espoused by the LDS faith.

I'm focusing on LDS Church's unique way of guilt-tripping and influencing people in ways that make thim unhappy or unfree or against their interests. Is a woman who wants to pursue a career being "selfish" by definition?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I post this for your perusal. I have yet to read it myself.

http://www.princetonprinciples.org/contents.html

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In recent years, marriage has weakened, with serious negative consequences for society as a whole. Four developments are especially troubling: divorce, illegitimacy, cohabitation, and same-sex marriage.

The purpose of this document is to make a substantial new contribution to the public debate over marriage. Too often, the rational case for marriage is not made at all or not made very well. As scholars, we are persuaded that the case for marriage can be made and won at the level of reason. Marriage protects children, men and women, and the common good. The health of marriage is particularly important in a free society, which depends upon citizens to govern their private lives and rear their children responsibly, so as to limit the scope, size, and power of the state. The nation's retreat from marriage has been particularly consequential for our society's most vulnerable communities: minorities and the poor pay a disproportionately heavy price when marriage declines in their communities. Marriage also offers men and women as spouses a good they can have in no other way: a mutual and complete giving of the self. Thus, marriage understood as the enduring union of husband and wife is both a good in itself and also advances the public interest.

We affirm the following ten principles that summarize the value of marriage- a choice that most people want to make, and that society should endorse and support.
Ten Principles on Marriage and the Public Good

* Marriage is a personal union, intended for the whole of life, of husband and wife.
* Marriage is a profound human good, elevating and perfecting our social and sexual nature.
* Ordinarily, both men and women who marry are better off as a result.
* Marriage protects and promotes the wellbeing of children.
* Marriage sustains civil society and promotes the common good.
* Marriage is a wealth-creating institution, increasing human and social capital.
* When marriage weakens, the equality gap widens, as children suffer from the disadvantages of growing up in homes without committed mothers and fathers.
* A functioning marriage culture serves to protect political liberty and foster limited government.
* The laws that govern marriage matter significantly.
* "Civil marriage" and "religious marriage" cannot be rigidly or completely divorced from one another.

This understanding of marriage is not narrowly religious, but the cross-cultural fruit of broad human experience and reflection, and supported by considerable social science evidence. But a marriage culture cannot flourish in a society whose primary institutions-universities, courts, legislatures, religions-not only fail to defend marriage but actually undermine it both conceptually and in practice.

Creating a marriage culture is not the job for government. Families, religious communities, and civic institutions-along with intellectual, moral, religious, and artistic leaders-point the way. But law and public policy will either reinforce and support these goals or undermine them. We call upon our nation's leaders, and our fellow citizens, to support public policies that strengthen marriage as a social institution including:

* Protect the public understanding of marriage as the union of one man with one woman as husband and wife.
* Investigate divorce law reforms.
* End marriage penalties for low-income Americans.
* Protect and expand pro-child and pro-family provisions in our tax code.
* Protect the interests of children from the fertility industry.

Families, religious communities, community organizations, and public policymakers must work together towards a great goal: strengthening marriage so that each year more children are raised by their own mother and father in loving, lasting marital unions. The future of the American experiment depends on it. And our children deserve nothing less.

One nonsequitur after another.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

YOu're being condescending. This was one of creekster's worst posts and he regrets it now. A real doink.

Hogwash. I will admit it when I am called out or wrong. I have said before that mikewaters has posted some hilarious zingers. I have admitted that pelagius's biceps are confusing my pants. And I have stated that your facial hair would rest comfortably along the nape of my neck.

Creekster is one of the few on this board who can send out a porch poo blast and make it seem charming. Do you deny?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

I'm receptive to the "because the Prophet said so" argument

This is why it's fruitful to quote Brigham Young saying slavery is divinely sanctioned because of the creatonist mark of Ham doctrine.