cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-30-2008, 10:17 PM   #1
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default Being on the wrong side of history

How many times is the Church going to be on the wrong side of history?

The Church has been wrong on the key civil rights issues of the 20th century: dead wrong on equal rights for women and dead wrong on civil rights for blacks. And now the Church is on the wrong side of the gay marriage issue. If it doesn't seem disgraceful now, it will seem that way 30 years from now.

If marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and marriage between two men or two women is not ordained of God, then why can't the Church simply maintain that position without fighting legal recognition of gay marriage.

I fail to see how allowing gays to be legally married could affect LDS theology. Roe v. wade didn't force the Church to accept abortion (not that abortion is the moral equivalent of gay marriage). Besides, gay couples ALREADY refer to themselves as "married," so what's the big deal?? Is the main fear that gays will be accepted by society?

I think the Church is afraid that it will be a slippery slope to allowing gay marriage in the temple, but that fear seems irrational to me.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:19 PM   #2
creekster
Senior Member
 
creekster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
creekster is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MudphudCoug View Post
How many times is the Church going to be on the wrong side of history?

The Church has been wrong on the key civil rights issues of the 20th century: dead wrong on equal rights for women and dead wrong on civil rights for blacks. And now the Church is on the wrong side of the gay marriage issue. If it doesn't seem disgraceful now, it will seem that way 30 years from now.

If marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and marriage between two men or two women is not ordained of God, then why can't the Church simply maintain that position without fighting legal recognition of gay marriage.

I fail to see how allowing gays to be legally marriage could affect LDS theology. Roe v. wade didn't force the Church to accept abortion (not that abortion is the moral equivalent of gay marriage). Besides, gay couples ALREADY refer to themselves as "married," so what's the big deal?? Is the main fear that gays will be accepted by society?

I think the Church is afraid that it will be a slippery slope to allowing gay marriage in the temple, but that fear seems irrational to me.
One quibble off the top: The church was not wrong about equal rights for women. It opposed the ERA, which was not adopted and has not been adopted. It supported other rights for women. It also was not opposed to civil rights for blacks, unless you think it is a civil right to have the priesthood, and I doubt you do. If you have something else in mind, spell it out.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos.
creekster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:28 PM   #3
Tex
Senior Member
 
Tex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
Tex is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MudphudCoug View Post
How many times is the Church going to be on the wrong side of history?

The Church has been wrong on the key civil rights issues of the 20th century: dead wrong on equal rights for women and dead wrong on civil rights for blacks. And now the Church is on the wrong side of the gay marriage issue. If it doesn't seem disgraceful now, it will seem that way 30 years from now.

If marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and marriage between two men or two women is not ordained of God, then why can't the Church simply maintain that position without fighting legal recognition of gay marriage.

I fail to see how allowing gays to be legally married could affect LDS theology. Roe v. wade didn't force the Church to accept abortion (not that abortion is the moral equivalent of gay marriage). Besides, gay couples ALREADY refer to themselves as "married," so what's the big deal?? Is the main fear that gays will be accepted by society?

I think the Church is afraid that it will be a slippery slope to allowing gay marriage in the temple, but that fear seems irrational to me.
Mudphud = Sooner.

Ok, now I see it.
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?"
"And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..."

- Cali Coug

"Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got."

- Brigham Young
Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:38 PM   #4
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
One quibble off the top: The church was not wrong about equal rights for women. It opposed the ERA, which was not adopted and has not been adopted. It supported other rights for women.
Opposition to the ERA is not the same as opposition to equal rights for women? Maybe you're right. Can you explain to me why the ERA is a bad thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
It also was not opposed to civil rights for blacks, unless you think it is a civil right to have the priesthood, and I doubt you do. If you have something else in mind, spell it out.
An apostle writing a letter to a governor urging him to oppose civil rights for blacks doesn't count?
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:44 PM   #5
Goatnapper'96
Recruiting Coordinator/Bosom Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,412
Goatnapper'96 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MudphudCoug View Post
An apostle writing a letter to a governor urging him to oppose civil rights for blacks doesn't count?
Not for defining the Church as against Civil Rights. If you had said we have members, even high members in the priesthood hierarchy, opposed to civil rights it would have been accurate.
__________________
She had a psychiatrist who said because I didn't trust the water system, the school system, the government, I was paranoid," he said. "I had a psychiatrist who said her psychiatrist was stupid."
Goatnapper'96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:44 PM   #6
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96 View Post
Not for defining the Church as against Civil Rights. If you had said we have members, even high members in the priesthood hierarchy, opposed to civil rights it would have been accurate.
OK. Point taken. I guess the Church was doing everything possible to look racist without actually taking racist positions with regard to the law.

I still think that the Church is wrong on the gay marriage issue.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:47 PM   #7
Goatnapper'96
Recruiting Coordinator/Bosom Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,412
Goatnapper'96 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MudphudCoug View Post
OK. Point taken. I guess the Church was doing everything possible to look racist without actually taking racist positions with regard to the law.

I still think that the Church is wrong on the gay marriage issue.
I know a hell of a lot of racists who support civil rights.
__________________
She had a psychiatrist who said because I didn't trust the water system, the school system, the government, I was paranoid," he said. "I had a psychiatrist who said her psychiatrist was stupid."
Goatnapper'96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:49 PM   #8
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96 View Post
I know a hell of a lot of racists who support civil rights.
Yeah, I didn't differentiate between those things very well. My bad.

Question: Did the Church vocally support civil rights for blacks? If so, then they were on the right side on this issue. If not, then they were on the wrong side. That's my opinion.

And I still think that the Church is wrong on the gay marriage issue.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:50 PM   #9
creekster
Senior Member
 
creekster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
creekster is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

On the ERA. There is a lawsuit in California right now seeking to hold a professional sports team liable for vilating a California equality staute by virtue of giving out free gifts to women on Mother's day to the exclusion of men. Would you like to constitutionalize this sort of litigation?
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos.
creekster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2008, 10:52 PM   #10
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
On the ERA. There is a lawsuit in California right now seeking to hold a professional sports team liable for vilating a California equality staute by virtue of giving out free gifts to women on Mother's day to the exclusion of men. Would you like to constitutionalize this sort of litigation?
No I wouldn't. Another point for Creekster.

I still think the Church is wrong on the gay marriage issue.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.