Mormons vs. Gay Marriage: So It´s One Man and One Woman Now, Is It?
y Candace Talmadge
The irony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) wading into California´s same-sex marriage debate is too delicious to ignore.
Earlier this week, the church sent a letter signed by its president, Thomas B. Monson, to all Mormon bishops in California. The document refers to the California Marriage Protection Act on the November 4 ballot, a state constitutional amendment that would prohibit the legal recognition of same-sex unions so recently won by a California Supreme Court decision.
The letter is to be read aloud during June 29 services. In part, it states, "We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to ensure that marriage in California is legally defined as between a man and a woman."
The document stops short of explicitly telling church members how to vote on the proposed state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. The Mormons probably can slide by on a technicality should the IRS ever inquire as to whether their church is engaging in political activities banned by its non-profit exemption status. (Not much danger of that, however. In the current administration, the IRS tends to investigate only those religious institutions that voice opposition to President Bush or his policies.)
This latest LDS political missive also declares that "marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God." A man and a woman, singular. A fascinating declaration from the one Western religion notorious for polygamy. That is, marriage between one man and one woman and one more woman and yet another woman, etc. The LDS church flip-flopped on this issue only when it became clear that Utah would not gain statehood without such a reversal.
Apparently the definition of marriage isn´t quite as unyielding and unchanging as some gay-marriage opponents would have us all think.
Still, if marriage is between a man and a woman (singular), why isn´t the LDS church equally exhorting its members to efforts against those who call themselves Mormons and still practice polygamy (rebranded as plural marriage)? Where´s the institutional outrage over this situation?
See Mormons vs. Gay Marriage: So It´s One Man and One Woman Now, Is It?
American Chronicle, CA -

2 Comments:
Yep, it's ironic... Still, the word polygamy is:
“from L.L. polygamia, from Late Gk. polygamia "polygamy," from polygamos "often married," from polys "many" + gamos "marriage" (see gamete). Not etymologically restricted to marriage of one man and multiple women (technically polygyny), but often used as if it were.”
( polygamy. (n.d.). Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved June 28, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/polygamy.)
At least the Mormon definition did not disallow marriage entirely. This is what California has done. There is no more marriage in California law... That's the only way gays and married folks can be equal under the law. Why? Because gay folks can't get married, can't be husband and wife.
By
paulbenedict, At
Saturday, June 28, 2008 12:48:00 PM
Polygamy has never been a threat of being accepted by our government. Gay marriage is currently threatening the fundamental unit of society, the family.
article6blog.com mentions, "You know what - throughout history, the church has established marriage, and in this country and some others, the government simply chose to put its imprimatur on it - because it was the very foundation of society. This is really more about politics sticking its nose in religion’s business."
By
Officer Leeroy, At
Monday, June 30, 2008 8:33:00 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home