LDS letter on same-sex marriage

[madhatter85]

I don't think Mormonism is righteous, either, but should the state or the public care what you or I personally think is "righteous" or not? No, because you know, freedom?

I'm goign to vote they way i see fit because of my higher standards than the rest of the world. I could care less what you or anyone else thinks in regards to this issue.

 

[Storm]

IIRC, the Catholic Church does not recognize remarriage without an annulment. Are they being sued for such recognition? If anyone has brought such a lawsuit, did they win?

 

[misanthropic_clown]

It may seem liek that but you do not understand the gravity of the situation.

I know that the prophets have seen what it would do and what kind of problems it would cause for the freedom to enjoy religion.

The enjoyment of religious freedom takes a back seat in every legal issue there is. and there will be lawsuits and political lobbying against churches who do not recognize SSM, who refuse to perform them and such. And yes, even though the church does not owe anything to anyone, there will still be problems that arise for the church because of legalaizing same sex marriages.

Well then, you lobby for a rider to be put on the acceptance of same sex marriage; that religious institutions should be free to consider whether they are willing to practice them or not without becoming liable for discrimination lawsuits. I think people would take your argument a lot more seriously if that was the road you were going down.

 

[Father Heathen]

and this is why i am going to just hit the ignore button because of you're bafooning around not knowing about anything you're talking about. you're on the same level as Fish-Hunter in my book.

What's the problem? If gay marriage should be illegal just because you find it "immoral", then it would be okay for marriage between Mormons to be made illegal just because someone else finds it "immoral". If not, what makes you so special? I find it a bit arrogant that you think everyone else's rights and freedoms should take a back seat to your silly voodoo.

 

[madhatter85]

What's the problem? If gay marriage should be illegal just because you find it "immoral", then it would be okay for marriage between Mormons to be made illegal just because someone else finds it "immoral". If not, what makes you so special? I find it a bit arrogant that you think everyone else's rights and freedoms should take a back seat to your silly voodoo.

If you feel it inappropriate for mormons to marry, go for it, lobby it all youw ant try to get a law passed. I dare you, I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU. seriously, go do it. you are entitled to your opinions just as much as any of us are.

 

[misanthropic_clown]

Come now Madhatter - you are hardly being a sensible advocate. I can sympathise with what are issues of morality, but the insistence that your morality be put into political action is what brings you into disrepute in my eyes.

 

[Autodidact]

It may seem liek that but you do not understand the gravity of the situation.

I know that the prophets have seen what it would do and what kind of problems it would cause for the freedom to enjoy religion.

The enjoyment of religious freedom takes a back seat in every legal issue there is.

In that case you should be supporting SSM, so that the many churches and synagogues that do recognize it can be free to perform it and have it recognized by the state.

and there will be lawsuits and political lobbying against churches who do not recognize SSM, who refuse to perform them and such.

utterly wrong. Complete lie. Just plain wrong. This is not even on the cards. Illustrates the poster's utter ignorance of reality.

And yes, even though the church does not owe anything to anyone, there will still be problems that arise for the church because of legalaizing same sex marriages.

 

[Apex]

Come now Madhatter - you are hardly being a sensible advocate. I can sympathise with what are issues of morality, but the insistence that your morality be put into political action is what brings you into disrepute in my eyes.

Yes Madhatter, please stop. You are doing nothing but embarrassing the rest of us.

 

[Autodidact]

If you feel it inappropriate for mormons to marry, go for it, lobby it all youw ant try to get a law passed. I dare you, I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU. seriously, go do it. you are entitled to your opinions just as much as any of us are.

1. This poster does not seem to grasp the concept of an argument, as opposed to a proposal.
2. We did this in the 19th century, which is why LDS no longer permits polygamy. It was rather effective, FLDS aside.

 

[Autodidact]

Come now Madhatter - you are hardly being a sensible advocate. I can sympathise with what are issues of morality, but the insistence that your morality be put into political action is what brings you into disrepute in my eyes.

opcorn:

 

[Autodidact]

Well then, you lobby for a rider to be put on the acceptance of same sex marriage; that religious institutions should be free to consider whether they are willing to practice them or not without becoming liable for discrimination lawsuits. I think people would take your argument a lot more seriously if that was the road you were going down.

Not necessary; it's already in the Constitution. The Mormons could refuse to perform monogamous marriages if they wanted, and no one could touch them.

 

[Father Heathen]

If you feel it inappropriate for mormons to marry, go for it, lobby it all youw ant try to get a law passed. I dare you, I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU. seriously, go do it. you are entitled to your opinions just as much as any of us are.

But I don't find it inappropriate for Mormons to marry. It's called an analogy, which are apparently lost on you. And even if I did believe something like that, I wouldn't be about trying to turn my morals into your laws because I'm better than that - I respect your rights and freedom.

 

[misanthropic_clown]

Not necessary; it's already in the Constitution. The Mormons could refuse to perform monogamous marriages if they wanted, and no one could touch them.

Quite true in the USA, but I think it is something that is potentially wide open in the UK - but I do not think that it is something the gay-marriage lobby would be seeking. The entire point of the matter is that they want the religious to stop making claims of marriage control - I highly doubt they would then turn to the religious to perform the marriage ceremony.

 

[Autodidact]

I'll make a deal with madhatter. If he will agree to same-sex marriage, I'll agree to let Mormons refuse to perform them.

btw, too bad we won't be around in 100 years to see whether this, like so many other Mormon doctrines, has changed.

 

[misanthropic_clown]

btw, too bad we won't be around in 100 years to see whether this, like so many other Mormon doctrines, has changed.

name 5

Edit: (I personally can only really think of two biggies)

 

[madhatter85]

But I don't find it inappropriate for Mormons to marry. It's called an analogy, which are apparently lost on you. And even if I did believe something like that, I wouldn't be about trying to turn my morals into your laws because I'm better than that - I respect your rights and freedom.

i really just don't care. I will be voting for the constitutional ammendment to ban same sex marriage in this country because of my own moral values.

your flaming me only strengthens my resolve and knowlege of how immoral the world really is right now.

 

[Apex]

name 5

Edit: (I personally can only really think of two biggies)

I can only think of 1.

 

[Father Heathen]

i really just don't care. I will be voting for the constitutional ammendment to ban same sex marriage in this country because of my own moral values.

your flaming me only strengthens my resolve and knowlege of how immoral the world really is right now.

:clap

Btw, I noticed that Plato and Socrates are mentioned in your signature. Didn't you know they were both homosexuals?

 

[misanthropic_clown]

I can only think of 1.

I assume you are talking about black priesthood as your one. I added polygamy as the second, even though I guess it doesn't count for much of a doctrinal change it is certainly the one that pops into most peoples' heads first.

 

[Apex]

I assume you are talking about black priesthood as your one. I added polygamy as the second, even though I guess it doesn't count for much of a doctrinal change it is certainly the one that pops into most peoples' heads first.

You are correct. I did not consider polygamy due to the issues I am discussing in my other thread on legislating morality in that it was basically a federally forced change.