Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Church's new site on protecting marriage:

I had the unique opportunity to listen to the broadcast of Elder Ballard, Elder Cook (both of the Quorum of the Twelve), and Elder Clayton (of the Presidency of the Seventy) tonight as they addressed the issue of protecting marriage in California with Prop 8. What a powerful, powerful meeting! They made it so very clear that it is an opportunity and a responsibility to defend and sustain marriage, and thus to defend and sustain the plan and kingdom of God.

Make no mistake; there is clarity and unity about this issue among the prophets of God. With all the recent (and intense and direct!) talk of the need for us to be unified as a Church, I wish there was a way to communicate how important I have felt it is for us as members of the Church to stand with our leaders and respond to their invitation however we can. Their position is unequivocal and very, very clear. This is a call to action, perhaps unprecedented, with the potential to impact generations to come.

We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage.

As part of their desire to support us in defending traditional marriage however we can, they have created a new website, Take a look and spread the word!

Even if you are not of my faith, I invite you to consider this issue carefully. In my meager attempt to 'do what I can,' over the next while, I will share some of my thoughts on this topic and why I feel so strongly that marriage should remain between a man and a woman. There are many, many reasons beyond just my faith, even as that certainly has played a role in my position on this issue.

I have a renewed desire to do all I can to sustain, support, and protect marriage as it has always been -- between a man and a woman. I invite you to do the same.


  1. Do you know if the church leaders received a prophecy on this issue?

  2. anonymous,

    I'm not sure what you mean by receiving a prophecy, but I believe they are speaking with the power of prophecy and revelation when they talk about the plan of God and how central marriage is to that plan. I also am struck by the warning in the Proclamation that states that the disintegration of the family as defined by God (which, of course, could come from other things as well as SSM) will bring upon us calamities and problems foretold by ancient and modern prophets.

    I personally don't need to know all the details of what they know, have seen, etc. I have felt the Spirit confirm their teachings about the plan of salvation and about this issue. And they are completely unified as a body on this issue. I don't need any more than that to believe they are acting as prophets, seers, and revelators.

    I hope that answers your questions. :)

  3. great response to the question! i second your comments!

  4. I think anonymous's question is a good one, and I appreciate your response, but I have a few questions. When the priesthood was granted to blacks some time ago, didn't that come as the result of a revelation? And wasn't it announced churchwide? Did that, too, not matter? When does it matter whether or not there is a revelation?

    It seems that if you don't personally know all the details of what they know, have seen, etc., you must seek to know all of the information relative to the issue and make a personal decision based upon study and prayer and proper living. You suggest that you have done that and have felt that the Spirit confirmed their teachings. In my case, I too have listened to the authorities of the Church, read what they have had to say, and considered prayerfully the entire issue, but I have come to the opposite conclusion. I still have questions and concerns about their arguments and observations. I think it's appropriate to ask the question: have they had a revelation?

    Doesn't the declaration and the pronouncement of a revelation and having it sustained count for anything?

  5. I have to respectfully disagree with anonymous # 2. The church has never said anything but that it does not agree with gay marriage. It has never sat idly by waiting to make an announcement about whether the church supports or opposes it. It has always been known church wide that while we respect the decisions of gays, we do not accept gay marriage as being legal or approved of God. Since the doctrine has always been clear, why would the church need more revelation?

    The Proclamation to the World on Family was clarified with this quote: "This proclamation is a declaration and reaffirmation of doctrines and practices that prophets have stated repeatedly throughout the history of the Church." Proclamation. We don't have to have the whole church "decide" that the leaders had a revelation. They either had it or didn't and us deciding one way or the other doesn't change the facts. I agree that we should seek the Lord's Council, but not to decide whether the leaders have had revelation, but rather for us to know how our lives should reflect the revelation we know they have. Anyway, that's my 2 cents for what it's worth.

  6. djinn,
    Even all those variations don't disprove the rule. Exceptions to anything will always exist, but, imo, the law doesn't exist to protect every variation that exists.

    The 'norm' is and has always been marriage between a man and a woman.

    As to following the prophets, there is much more to this for me now than just that. I have my own concerns as a citizen and that is a key reason I am supporting prop 8. I know some will dismiss my concerns, but like I said elsewhere, that is what this is all about. We each act and vote based on what we believe to be the best course for the country, for rights, for children, for families, for lots of reasons. I believe that on the whole, this is the best course -- to preserve marriage between a man and a woman.

    Obviously, your views differ. Isn't democracy grand?

  7. As an honest question, why does marriage between a man and a woman need preserving? Do you think it will spontaneously disappear without legal restrictions?

    To me, we are preserving it from being more or less than between a man and a woman. That is the doctrinal rule, that is the societal rule (again, exceptions don't discount or disprove that the rule exists).

    I don't think anything will spontaneously happen. But I do think that we really aren't sure WHAT will happen and I'm not comfortable with the idea of engaging in such a social and political and legal experiment.

    And, if you let me have my LDS hat on for a minute, marriage between a man and a woman is also just simply fundamental to the plan of God. I feel duty bound to protect it.

    But as I have said elsewhere, there is more than just my faith driving me on this issue.

  8. If you read our other standard works, it's pretty clear that one wife is the rule.

    But at some point, the point to me is that our current prophets take this stand, so the patterns of the past are not really relevant in my mind.