The passage of Prop 8

Nov 06, 2008 15:32

As I'm sure we all are, I am sad and angry about the passage of the discriminatory Prop 8, and also of other anti-GLBT propositions in other states ( Read more... )

!!mod note

Leave a comment

green_knight November 7 2008, 08:48:39 UTC
I'm suprised the Mormon Church would support something that goes against the Mormon notion of marriage - _a man and a woman_ means that _a man and several women_ does nto count as marriage, either. Then again, I am not suprised at hatred and homophobia coming out of the Mormon Church, unfortunately.

As previous civil rights struggles have shown, it's a long road, and progression isn't always linear. rachelmanija, I am assuming there is an ongoing campaign, and that it will need funds - can you repost the information?

Reply

fluffydragon November 7 2008, 14:42:48 UTC
I don't think mormon and LDS are necessairly the same, are they? I thought LDS was the one that was into the multiple wives thing.

Reply

tricksterquinn November 8 2008, 02:27:54 UTC
You're thinking FLDS.

LDS (Latter-Day Saints) is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, commonly known as the Mormon church.

FLDS is Fundamentalist Latter-Day Saints and refers to a specific sect of the LDS Church. FLDS people practice polygamy, while the mainstream LDS church does not any more (though it did when it was founded in the early 1800s).

These factoids and more brought to you by living in Utah.

Reply

aki_hoshi November 7 2008, 18:50:17 UTC
The Mormon Church renounced polygamy in the late 1800's...it's just still practiced in some factions (albeit illegally). Many of the active and larger congregations are against polygamy, so, not to defend the actions of the Mormon Church regarding this issue, but I'm sure they were doing it purely for the basic beliefs of most Christian churches.

Reply

lee_rowan November 8 2008, 02:44:45 UTC
The thing is, though, the one-man-one-woman isn't dictated by Jesus, and it isn't dictated by the Old Testament, either.

The sensible thing to do would be to rescind the legal, civil definition of "marriage," replace it with "civil union" for ALL couples, and make marriage a private, religious matter. The government should not have gotten itself into the "marriage" business in the first place.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up