An alternative to anti-Mormon protests

[Green Gaia]

The Volokh Conspiracy - An alternative to anti-Mormon protests: Read this.

Leaders of the Mormon Church urged their followers to contribute to a constitutional ban on marriage for gay families, a call that apparently resulted in the bulk of the donations to that effort in California. Religious leaders and their adherents are of course free to oppose gay marriage. But when you enter the political fray, you are not exempt from public criticism and protest just because you are a religion or have religious reasons for your advocacy. It's not anti-religious bigotry to call attention, loudly and angrily, to what you have done.


Moreover, despite the focus on a few extremists whose words have indeed crossed the line into religious (and racist) bigotry over the past few days, the anti-Prop 8 rallies have been peaceful and mostly respectful. Frankly, if marriage had been denied to blacks, Mormons, Catholics, or almost any other group, it's hard to imagine the reaction would have been as mild as it's been.


Nevertheless, I am uncomfortable with pickets directed at specific places of worship like the Mormon church in Los Angeles. It's too easy for such protests to degenerate into the kinds of ugly religious intolerance this country has long endured. Mormons, in particular, have historically suffered rank prejudice and even violence. Epithets and taunts directed at individuals are especially abhorrent. Individual Mormons (and blacks and others) bravely and publicly opposed Prop 8. Even those who supported Prop 8 are not all anti-gay bigots, though I saw plenty of anti-gay bigotry when I was in California last week. As I've repeatedly argued, there are genuine concerns about making a change like this to an important social institution. Those concerns are misplaced and overwrought, but they are not necessarily bigoted.


Here's my advice to righteously furious gay-marriage supporters: Stop the focus on the Mormon Church. Stop it now. We just lost a ballot fight in which we were falsely but effectively portrayed as attacking religion. So now some of us attack a religion? People were warned that churches would lose their tax-exempt status, which was untrue. So now we have (frivolous) calls for the Mormon Church to lose its tax-exempt status? It's rather selective indignation, anyway, since lots of demographic groups gave us Prop 8 in different ways — some with money and others with votes. I understand the frustration, but this particular expression of it is wrong and counter-productive.


Public protest against a constitutional ban on marriage for gay families is entirely justified. More than a mere vote, protests communicate intensity of feelings. They're valuable in a democracy. Something incredibly precious was lost on Tuesday. Those who lost it should not be expected to go back quietly to producing great art and show tunes for everybody's amusement.
I understand a rally is planned for the state capitol in Sacramento. That's more like it.


If a more intense physical expression of anger and frustration is needed, why not have sit-ins at marriage-license bureaus in California? It could be modeled on the sit-ins at segregated lunch counters in the 1960s. The demonstrations would be targeted at government buildings — rather than at churches. And after all, it's government policy we're legitimately protesting, not religious doctrine. Let people get arrested as they sing "We Shall Overcome." The protesters themselves — gay and straight, single and married, black and white, Mormon and Catholic, Republicans and Democrats, moms and dads raising kids — would suffer and accept the legal consequences of their acts. Rather than instilling fear and resentment in others, rather than dividing people on religious and racial lines, they would literally be putting their own bodies on the line for the good of their relationships, their families, their friends, and for a just cause whose time has come. We've had enough of lawyers, courts, focus groups, and media handlers. Let peaceful protesters by the thousands be dragged away just because they want to marry. It would be good old-fashioned civil disobedience, an American protest tradition.

 

[Heartfelt]

Not to be unsympathetic to Mormons but we all vote on the rights of ALL who live in this country...which means we DO vote on one another's rights everytime something get's put into or out of law...that is what democracy is...We really don't have the freedoms that we once had when this country was based on religious principles...try looking up 'The Mayflower Compact' once...see how it was meant to be.

 

[Green Gaia]

Except this is not a Democracy, but a Republic. This is to protect the rights of a minority from the tyranny of the majority. We should NOT be voting on the civil rights of citizens and this country should NOT be based on religious law, then it would be a theocracy which would negate the religious freedom we in this country enjoy. But that is not the point of the thread, but thank you for the post.

 

[LuisDantas]

Hey, that's quite an idea, Gaia. Thanks for bringing our attention to this text.

 

[Luminous]

Not to be unsympathetic to Mormons but we all vote on the rights of ALL who live in this country...which means we DO vote on one another's rights everytime something get's put into or out of law...that is what democracy is...We really don't have the freedoms that we once had when this country was based on religious principles...try looking up 'The Mayflower Compact' once...see how it was meant to be.

Salem was such a great "city upon a hill". I wonder what went wrong. i believe it was religious persecution. Many would like to think that our privalages do not come from the will of the State, but they do. If we had any God-given rights, then it would be up to God to protect them. right to life, dear Jesus?

In our republic, we do not vote on rights but on privilages. those who's privilages are taken away from them are being punished by the state for wrong do-ing.

 

[kiwimac]

Sound reasoning in the OP but I do have to say that I can understand calls to protest at LDs chapels and Temples.

 

[Green Gaia]

Sound reasoning in the OP but I do have to say that I can understand calls to protest at LDs chapels and Temples.

I can understand it too and the protests are not unwarranted. I just think, and the OP agrees, that perhaps that is not the best way to get the message we want across. Religion is big business and can generate a lot of money for or against a cause as we can clearly see happened in this case. I know we will never get some to support our side, but maybe we can get them to a place where they won't put up roadblocks to glbt people being treated equally.

 

[sojourner]

A Mormon ban on gay marriage. One has to wonder how they reconcile that with their own morality issue that precipitated their persecution and subsequent ousting from several states: Polygamy?

 

[Elessar]

Difference being, though, that the mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints banned polygamy a century ago. They gave up that fight.

 

[Worshipper]

I can understand calls to protest at LDs chapels and Temples.

Do you understand that such actions hurt those of us who have opposed legislation like Prop 8 just as much as it hurts those of our fellow Mormons who have supported such legislation? Why hurt your allies because of their religion? How can that possibly help our cause?

Attacking places of worship doesn't hurt the organization. It hurts the worshippers. When temples have to close down because of protests going on outside them, it doesn't hurt the Church. It hurts the worshippers who wanted to worship in the temple — some of whom might have had specific appointments for that day that they'd been planning for months. Appointments like weddings. Protests like this can hinder marriages among people who themselves voted against Prop 8. How can stopping the marriage of someone who supports marriage for all possibly be in keeping with the spirit of the No-on-8 fight?

I have always opposed legislation of this type, but the post-election protests that have hindered Mormon worship have made me almost want to switch sides out of sheer spite. Almost. Another man's vice is no excuse for me to forgo virtue. But it is very offensive when my allies fight against me simply because I worship with people who were our common opponents.

 

[lilithu]

The Volokh Conspiracy - An alternative to anti-Mormon protests: Read this.

Thank gawd, some sanity! And the author clearly understands the true power of civil disobedience. What worked for Jesus, Gandhi, and King.

 

[gnostic]

If you want to ban gay marriage, then another proposal should be to ban Mormon elders from knocking at doors and preaches to people.

Would that be fair trade-off?

Gays and lesbians can give up their rights, ONLY IF Mormons do the same.

Other religious sects were against Mormons in its early history, but apparently some LDS members have forgotten what it is like to be scorned, taunted, if not precisely persecuted. It's shame that they have forgotten their own history.

 

[deseretgov]

If you want to ban gay marriage, then another proposal should be to ban Mormon elders from knocking at doors and preaches to people.

Would that be fair trade-off?

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...

Gays and lesbians can give up their rights, ONLY IF Mormons do the same.

the gays and lesbians haven't given up any rights. And you do realize that LDS made up less than 5% of the voters? Are you going to take away the rights of the rest of teh 95% Who decides what rights will be taken away. That's a pretty big demand from a group who got their political agenda crushed and their feelings hurt.

Other religious sects were against Mormons in its early history, but apparently some LDS members have forgotten what it is like to be scorned, taunted, if not precisely persecuted. It's shame that they have forgotten their own history.

The difference is the LDS suffered persecution for the sake of righteousness. The gays and lesbians got their feeliongs hurt because they didn't get their wicked lifestyle accepted by society. We haven't forgoten our own history. It's not about persecution, its about living in harmony with God's commandments.

 

[Father Heathen]

The difference is the LDS suffered persecution for the sake of righteousness. The gays and lesbians got their feeliongs hurt because they didn't get their wicked lifestyle accepted by society.

The exact same thing could be said vice versa. I think religious fundamentalism is far, far more unhealthy than homosexuality could ever hope to be.

 

[deseretgov]

The exact same thing could be said vice versa. I think religious fundamentalism is far, far more unhealthy than homosexuality could ever hope to be.

That's the entire reason for the arguements. It's all based on opinon.

 

[lilithu]

The difference is the LDS suffered persecution for the sake of righteousness. The gays and lesbians got their feeliongs hurt because they didn't get their wicked lifestyle accepted by society.

Sounds more like self-righteousness to me. (And I'm directing that only at you and those who agree with you on this.)

Btw, the topic of THIS thread is how to respond to the passage of prop 8. Not "what is your opinion on gays and lesbians?" There seems to be no shortage of those threads. I suggest you take your "opinion" elsewhere. You are doing a sucky job of being an "ambassador."

 

[Apex]

The difference is the LDS suffered persecution for the sake of righteousness. The gays and lesbians got their feeliongs hurt because they didn't get their wicked lifestyle accepted by society.

I hope you realize this is a matter of opinion. The reactions from the protesters have been absolutely revolting, immoral, and illegal. However, statements like yours are only going to make the situation worse.

 

[gnomon]

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...

So, when churches belonging to the Unitarian Universalists, the United Church of Christ and the United Church of Canada perform a wedding and join two homosexuals in "marriage" as they define it, whose First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion is being violated?

 

[lilithu]

So, when churches belonging to the Unitarian Universalists, the United Church of Christ and the United Church of Canada perform a wedding and join two homosexuals in "marriage" as they define it, whose First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion is being violated?

 

[deseretgov]

Sounds more like self-righteousness to me. (And I'm directing that only at you and those who agree with you on this.)

Btw, the topic of THIS thread is how to respond to the passage of prop 8. Not "what is your opinion on gays and lesbians?" There seems to be no shortage of those threads. I suggest you take your "opinion" elsewhere.

I was simply responding to a post. But you are right. Sorry for going off topic.

You are doing a sucky job of being an "ambassador."

It's not my job to make people feel good about themselves. I say what I think.