I agree Its not like they forced this upon anyone.. There was a vote.. The vote passed. You can not be any more fair. The people of all faiths and religion agree and unite for the cause of marriage between a man and woman..

The gay supporters are acting like the LDS church and other church's has " cheated them " but the thing they don't realize is this was a vote that everyone eligible to vote could put in their thoughts. The vote passed. Deal with it and move on and quit singling out 1 church because of it.

Good job old man! Way to stand up for what you believe in and unite other religions to come together for a common cause of goodness and to stand up for what you know is RIGHT.

Good job @OLD_SCHOOL - I am happy other Church's are defending the LDS, and Marriage.

I've said it before @BYUROCKS - And I'll say it again because it's true. These people protesting are giving mormons WAY too much credit. Sure, a lot of them turned up to vote, but they just don't have the kind of influence this protest claims they have.

They must think that a majority of the people who voted in favor of Prop 8 were mormon. Maybe they should actually do a rundown of population statistics in California and realize that there's no way the mormons alone could have influenced the vote that much. If mormons really had that much influence, a few other things would be changing as well:

Mitt Romney would have won the presidential election.

Every business in the country would be closed all day on Sundays and after 5 PM on Monday nights.

Beer would not exist.

95% of teen clothing stores in the country would be closed for selling immodest clothing.

Protestors wouldn't be allowed within 200 miles of Salt Lake City on general conference weekend.

Mormons don't even have enough pull in Utah to get EVERYTHING they want (they do get most of it however), does anybody really believe the tiny minority of mormons in California has that much sway with all the baptist and catholic people who voted in favor of Prop 8? Honestly...

Actually its the money... @wilco64256 - The LDS church and it's members were only 2% of the voters in California but apparently the LDS Church donated about HALF of all the money that was raised to pass this vote...and most of that money came from LDS outside of California.


Apparently that is why the gays are up here protesting.


Just trying to clarify the issue.

I think it was actually MEMBERS of the church @Bob C. - that donated the money for the most part, I highly doubt that the church itself spent very much money except maybe by providing resources and in some cases personnel.

If it is wrong for members of a church to donate of their own free will to a cause that they have religious convictions about then this country is in serious trouble.

Even if the church did provide financial backing I still don't understand why the protests and stuff...seems kind of pointless to me since the church didn't do anything illegal or unethical.

I supported with $50 @pre - I live in Utah, but my daughters are church members in CA. My oldest daughter asked for help and I gave it to her for the following reasons:

1) I am personally not comfortable with the gay agenda, especially their social experiment to raise children. I believe there are too many unknowns in doing this. It is risky to expose children to this, in my opinion. When in doubt, WHERE CHILDREN ARE CONCERNED, I err on the side of protecting children.

2) This is not simply a California issue. The problem is that as United States, we agree to honor the unions and contracts of other states. Gays are not obligated to live their entire lives in California. When they come to a state where their union is illegal, what is society supposed to do?

3) I personally believe that marriage is an institution between one man and one woman. What California was doing by marrying gays was to set a precedence for many other types of unions which, I feel, would cheapen and demain the meaning of marriage.

4) I do not hate gays. I am not comfortable with their lifestyle, but I respect their choice to do whatever it is that they do. AND, I respect my choice to work towards keeping the definition of marriage as it was.

5) I will always aid my daughters when they are engaged in a good cause. I'm very lucky to have such great daughters. They have all of the respect in the world for those around them; too bad that the world is not always fair. This will pass.

I think you are generous to call these "reasons" @Al - 1) What you are comfortable with should have no sway in issues of equal protection under the law. Experiment? Agenda? Gays are simply living their lives in the same way as you and me. It isn't about livestyles or experiments. Children raised by gay couples do not fair any worse than children raised in other family configurations. Gay couples with children should enjoy the same protections for themselves and their children as heterosexual couples. If you err on the side of protecting children, then you shouldn't support a bigoted campaign that selectively denies protection to children of gay couples. Why would denying gay couples equal protection protect children. This makes no sense Al.

2) The US Supreme Court has clearly determined that states do not have to honor gay marriages performed in other states. But it is a bigoted denial of equal protection under the law to do so, and is wrong regardless the state.

3) If you think gay marriage cheapens or demeans marriage, don't participate in a gay marriage, but don't FORCE others to share in your bigoted anti-gay agenda through enforced government policies. Why should you be allowed to use government to deny equal protection based in your religious bigotries? You shouldn't have the right to deny others equal protection just because you have a religious superstition against a group. Your marriage will only be cheapened by YOUR behavior. Your "cheapening and demeaning" argument is blatantly bigoted and silly. If marriage is being cheapened, it is by heterosexuals who aren't honoring their commitments. Your side cheapens marriage by using it as a cheap political weapon against a select group you aren't "comforatble" with.

4) Being gay is not a lifestyle. Gays, like heterosexuals have varied lifestyles. Their sexual orientation is all they have in common, and sexual orientation is NOT a lifestyle. Is your heterosexuality a lifestyle? Lifestyles vary more between individuals than they do across groups--especially when grouped by sexual orientation. You seem to have some shallow imaginary view of a stereotyped gay lifestyle. I can't even imagine how you can assume a common lifestyle across such a diverse group.

5) This will pass. You are right, eventually you and your daughter's cause will be seen by most Americans as blatant bigotry and as a period of embarassment for those who denied equal protection to a select group. This is not a good cause, and willingly and zealously causing suffering to a select group is bigoted and it is hateful, regardless your personal emotions towards gays or your justification of your motivations. It is immoral to deny equal protection, and the anti-gay actions are based in a willingness and eagerness to cause suffering based in religious superstitions against gays. One doesn't show "all the respect in the world" for a group by denying them equal protection or by considering their participation in marriage as cheapening and demeaning. You are right it isn't fair and that it is too bad that it isn't, but then you contributed to the unfairness and injustice.

C.R....... @C.R. - you are a HATEFUL BIGOT! O.K. now we are on the same level of stupidity so we can reason together. Do you people ever get tired of listening to yourselves talk? No wonder you all feel so depressed and dejected. Everyone around you who considers sodomy and homosexuality immoral and degrading behavior must also therefore "hate, discriminate, persecute, condemn, ect, ect, ect, ......". As if the guilt associated with participating in such acts weren't enough already you pile in on yourselves pretending the rest of us actually care enough to hate you. I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you C.R., but here I go. WE DON'T CARE!!! We simply choose not to publicly redefine one of the most basic institutions of society in a vain and misguided attempt to sooth a burning conscience. If you choose to participate in exploring new heights of sexual perversion with someone equipped very much like you are, knock yourself out C.R. WE DON'T CARE!!! You have all the "equal protection" you need to pursue such things and no one CARES enough to get in your way.

I hate the bigoted denial of equal protection. @Jason T. - In this sense I am "hateful" I suppose. I also hate bullying and terrorism.

You may not care, but I do. It matters to me that people go out of their way to deny equal protection to a select group for no logical reason. I was raised to be empathetic and to have a strong sense of equality, justice and service. I guess that is one reason I have served so long in the military--I value protecting the Constitution and the rights it protects--including the right to equal protection under the law found in the Fourteenth Amendment.

As far as being a bigot, I am very willing to listen to reasonable justifications supporting your agenda Jason, but I honestly have read almost no reasonable arguments for denying equal protection to gays. I am willing to change my mind, but I won't be persuaded by faith-based superstitions Jason. Why should I be? Most of the comments I read in support of Prop 8 are based in religious bigotry and superstitions and blatant lies, not strong reasoning or self-evident moral principles. I have read a few reasonable arguments from the denial-of-equal-protection people, but they were few and are outweighted by the arguments against denying equal protection.

If not for religious bigotry against gays, I do not believe many people would deny them equal protection.

Why would you assume I am gay? Do you find it so inconceivable that a person would care about the equal protection of a group of which they are not a member?

I am a heterosexual father of five. My wife is beautiful and not "equipped very much like" me at all. I don't get depressed. I have faced many challenges including the loss of two children and many combat tours, but I don't get depressed and I certainly don't feel dejected. Why all the dehumanizing assumptions? It seems you do care enough to make the time to dehumanize me.

And what if I were gay? All things being equal, why is a gay person any less worthy of respect than a heterosexual person? To assume they are less worthy seems inherently bigoted and immoral. No person should participate in excessively dangerous or exploitive sexual relations, but this is the same for homosexuals and heterosexuals. It is the risk and exploitation that makes some sexual behavior wrong. Heterosexuals have proven themselve equally capable of exploitive and risky sexual behaviors. One justification for the state support of marriage is the providing of a context for safe and non-exploitive intimate relations. This is not the only purpose, but it is one purpose that is applicable to both gay and straight people.

It would be perverse for a gay person to have sex with a person of the opposite sex, because that is inconsistent with THEIR sexual orientation. It is not perverse for a gay person to have sex with a gay person, BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT. Do we all have to be the same to be good? They are different from you and me, but they are no less worthy of respect, and protection of the law. I also think they are no less worthy of love and respect generally, but that is not a legal issue.

It isn't that complex Jason. Gay people are different from you and me, and to expect them to live as if they are straight in order to be worthy of equal protection and respect is as perverse and wrong as expecting me or you to live as if we were gay. Enough. You don't care.

No such thing as an athiest in a fox hole @C.R. - right C.R.? It's funny that I've never had the privilege of meeting a real gay person on this forum. All the gay people here are "married with 5 children" as if that somehow gives them more credibility on the issue. Wouldn't it have been convenient for the Jews or Blacks in slavery to suddenly become German or White when fighting truly discriminatory and bigoted situations. Why is it that a gay person has that convenience?

It's truly sad that in all your years of service you still either haven't learned or choose to dishonestly define "equal protection" as if that were the issue here. When in the history of the world has marriage ever been defined as being between man and man or woman and woman? To redefine marriage to include those terms is just that, a re-definition in order to grant a special right to someone who chooses to mock and pervert human sexuality. It is your God given right to freely pervert and mock all you want and you have all the "equal protection" in this country you need to do so without fear of reprisal. To demand special and additional public benefits for privately pursuing new heights of sexual perversion is a misguided and ineffective attempt to sooth a burning conscience.

You're right. I don't care.

@Jason T. - "To redefine marriage to include those terms is just that, a re-definition in order to grant a special right to someone who chooses to mock and pervert human sexuality."

It's not special rights, it's equal rights; the right to marry the one you love, just as heterosexual couples do. I'm sorry you feel homosexuals are out to "mock and pervert human sexuality". Many people felt the same way about interracial marriage 150 years ago. I, for one, am happy we as a society have progressed from such bigoted nonsense.

Try as you may.... @Rotorblade - you can never claim to be on the same level as those who have truly been persecuted and mistreated simply for who they were (i.e. Blacks and Jews). To attempt such a claim is an insult to those people who have suffered such mistreatment and deserves a sincere apology. If you so CHOOSE to mock and pervert human sexuality, no one will imprison you, beat you, or put you in a death camp. If fact, society will go out of its way to ensure that you are free and protected to pursue whatever private perversions you choose to pursue. We simply choose not to reward you for those private escapades. Very different and not even deserving of a remote comparison to what those truly discriminated against groups had to suffer 150 years ago.

I know....it's not a choice, right? Explain that to the thousands who have found the courage to change and leave behind their once chosen homosexual behaviors. While your at it, name just one black person who changed who they were in order to escape slavery.

"The Choice" @Jason T. - to be gay or hetero is something we all make; Gay's want you to think it's not a choice, but we all make the choice. They want us to believe that they had "no choice". Well, I remember going through that period of life called early adolescence, and I remember "my choice" to discard homosexual thoughts and practices. Yes, it is a choice...... which leads me to my next point:

It's for this reason, that young girls and boys go through this short period of confusion, that I say that gay's raising children is a very dangerous experiment. For society to condone this behavior with the status of "marriage" would be akin to child-abuse. Don't we always want to give our children every chance to live normal, productive lives with a chance of genetic proliferation? Don't we want to keep them happy, and lead they toward loving natural relationships which are in harmony with the mainstream of nature?

I've noticed that most gays are young people who have not yet had kids, they're simply young and think that they have the world figured out. They have the ignorance and denial of youth going for them... they simply do not know that later in life, once the kids grow up and leave the nest... 99% of us know better. To paraphrase, "If you don't have liberal idea's when you're young, you have no heart. But if you don't have conservative idea's when you're old, you have no brain." There are few older people fighting for gay rights, who aren't simply trying to be popular with a majority of younger people.

Of course not @Jason T. - I never said anything about gays being treated as poorly as blacks and jews. I am simply stating that reasons for discriminating homosexual marriage are just as invalid as reasons for discriminating against interracial marriage.

C. R. @C.R. - BIGOT?? Understand the word, look up the definition. We are tired of the name calling. Your "quest" will never, never, never, pass. Look how you and your babies are acting. Name calling, vandalizing, violence, etc. You are proving to the nation your stupidity.

I don't know about you personally @none88 - Some people who supported Prop 8 did not do it out of bigotry, but if you read MOST of the comments that have been posted on this issue on KSL and other forums, you will see a clear trend of bigotry from those who support Prop 8. They base their views in superstitious bigotry against gays. Yes, I use the word "bigotry" very deliberately and it fits for MANY people who have written in favor of Prop 8 on this forum. Not all, but most is my qualifier.
My babies? What does that even mean? Weird.
Name calling and violence have been tactics of the anti-gay bigots for centuries and continue, but the actions of anti-gay bigots do not justify any in-kind actions from those who are against denying equal protection. These actions also do not show that all anti-gay people call names, vandalize or are violent. That would be a stupid assumption. Speaking of stupid assumptions:
How do the actions of a few people who are protesting the denial of equal protection to a select group prove my stupidity? That is stupid none88.

It almost didn't pass none88. Although some are alittle slow morally, we will wait patiently for you all to catch up as most of you did with civil rights for blacks and women. It is a matter of time. Of course fear could throw the moral progress down at any time, but we will lovingly and patiently work with you all.

It is still NOT an equal protection issue @C.R. - It is the gay community that is seeking to change the order of things by imposing a fundamental redefinition of the intrinsic purpose of marriage. Only by stripping marriage of its principal salient purpose can you turn this to an equal protection issue.

The government guarantees student loans because having an educated population is important for perpetuating society.

Is it, therefore, discriminatory if the government refuses to guarantee loans for some other purpose? Namely, is it reasonable for me to claim that I'm being discriminated against if the government won't guarantee a loan for me to start a business?

I assert that the benefits of marriage granted by the state are legitimate means of encouraging men and women to marry, have children and raise balanced, enlightened and self-disciplined children who understand the value of virtue and are devoted to and capable of carrying civilization on their shoulders; that the state has a compelling interest to that end; and that MARITAL RECOGNITION AND MARITAL BENEFITS SHOULD NOT BE EXTENDED FOR ANYTHING LESS.

Thus, I believe, the State does have a compelling interest in incentivizing heterosexual marriage.

Pray tell, what is the state's implicit compelling strategic interest for incentivizing marriage between two men?

I believe it is self-evident that the purpose of marrying a man and a woman is fundamentally different and richer than any purpose you can articulate for "marrying" two men.

Marriage constitutes the sanctioned institution for the legitimate exercise of procreative power.

This only becomes an equal rights or equal protection issue if we were to recast marriage as nothing more than a legal commitment between two people who love each other. Thus, the gay movement seeks to do violence to the traditional institution of marriage by fundamentally redefining its purpose; and stripping it of its most salient and unique feature.

Back to the business loan/student loan example. Just as a reasonable person will conclude that my claim of discrimination (because the government won't guarantee my business loan while it guarantees student loans) is specious, likewise, any reasonable person will conclude that denying marriage to gays is not an equal protection or equal rights issue unless you radically redefine the purpose of marriage.

You are mistaken and deceived if you buy into the lie that the churches' defensive stand is offensive in nature. It is the immoral/amoral who are on the offensive and seek to impose a new worldview by recasting the purpose of marriage as something else - and it does have profound implications for civilization and society.

You might still think that such a change is desirable and that you want to live in a society wherein the contrast between virtue and decrepitude is blurred. Perhaps you like the idea of loosening moral restraint and want your kids to inherit such a world. You are within your rights to attempt to instantiate such a place. But at least be honest enough with yourself to recognize that you are thus seeking to impose a new world view in place of the old one.

And be warned, your choices will define your destiny. Those who work to do violence to the ordained institution of marriage by redefining it will find themselves answerable to God for what they've done. Those who stand on the sidelines, blind and apathetic to the stakes will also inherit the wind.

@Revilo - "Marriage constitutes the sanctioned institution for the legitimate exercise of procreative power."

So, with that logic, heterosexual infertile couples are not very worthy of marriage?

@Rotorblade - Nope. because biologically they still have the necessary differences to produce children even if they are unable to themselves. If they try to produce a child in a sexual way they are doing what is necessary but it doesn't work. A gay couple is not biologically set up to reproduce. A gay couple has the same chance of producing children as I have as flapping my arms and start flying.

@sklater - It doesn't matter, neither party can produce children, regardless of having faulty equipment or no equipment at all; it's sixes. If the premise of denying homosexuals marital status is because of their inability to procreate, the same should apply to infertile heterosexual couples.

It's like someone applying for a pizza delivery job who has a car that is completely broken down beyond repair, and claiming they are more qualified for the job than someone who has no car at all.

@Rotorblade - Yes it does make a difference because of biological differences. Biological it is impossible for any person who tries asexual reproduction to reproduce sexually. It is not their inability to to procreate but biologically we are not made to reproduce that way. In all actuality, gay people can reproduce if they had sex with the opposite sex. They are not, they are committing to each other. If they say they can then have sex with other partners for the sake of reproducing then they are throwing out marriage all together and marriage should be banned. It is a choice to turn away from that which is biologically correct to something that is not. It has nothing to do with infertility, but it is like electromagnetic charges. No matter how hard you try, like charges will not attract.

Rotorblade @Rotorblade - First, my argument is about the state's broad strategic interests in marriage and your question is focused on an exceptional instance - you must be a bureaucrat. Try answering this instead: what is the state's implicit compelling strategic interest for incentivizing marriage between two men? I've outlined the state's interest in fostering heterosexual marriage, can you do the same for homosexual marriages?

Second, the more complete statement is "I assert that the benefits of marriage granted by the state are legitimate means of encouraging men and women to marry, have children and raise balanced, enlightened and self-disciplined children who understand the value of virtue and are devoted to and capable of carrying civilization on their shoulders; that the state has a compelling interest to that end; and that MARITAL RECOGNITION AND MARITAL BENEFITS SHOULD NOT BE EXTENDED FOR ANYTHING LESS." Not every couple will have children, not all children will be sound of mind and/or body, not all children will grow into model members of society as I've depicted. However, the exceptions prove the rule.

Third, can you tell by inspection which married couple will attempt to exercise procreative power but fail because of infertility? I think not. Conversely, with absolute certainty, I can tell you that coupling men is an infertile proposition in all instances.

Fourth, if you abandon the definition of Marriage as the state sponsored institution for sanctioning procreative power for the perpetuation of civilization and society, I submit that the state has no compelling interest in marriage and should get out of the business of licensing them and incentivizing altogether. If not the purpose outlined, then what justifies state involvement in the institution of marriage?

@Revilo - Good Point Revilo. I would argue that two loving people of the same sex are likely just as capable of effectively raising and caring for children via adoption or surrogacy as heterosexual couples, thus contributing to the well-being of society by having a functional intact family, thus creating state interest.

Rotorblade @Rotorblade - There is no shortage of married, male/female couples to adopt available children. Even if there were a surplus of children waiting for good homes, using children as pawns for social engineering is, to me, deeply troubling.

It is one thing if a couple of men decide to live with each other in a committed relationship. I might try to reason with them; but I wouldn't constrain them since they are legally consenting adults.

However, it is, in my opinion, quite a different matter to inject children, who cannot legally consent, into such a home and to subject them to an unnatural, biologically degenerate environment. There is much more to raising children than simply loving them. Parents imprint themselves on the children on a subconscious level and are the model for many of the child's a priori perceptions, beliefs, and understandings about the world, about adult roles and what constitutes healthy, virtuous relationships.

I do not believe it is in the children's interest, nor do I believe it is in the state's interest to do this to children. In fact, I believe that imprinting the rising generation with homosexual parents is contrary to the state's strategic interests that I outlined.

C.R @C.R. - C.R What makes a nation strong are it's committments to values and ways of life. Our nation was built and defined by Jedeo Christian principals.

Every country on this earth has laws, religion, and moral definitions that keep their society intact. For most of the middle east it is the principals of Islam, for Asia it is Buddism. Each of these countries derived most of their laws to reflect the majority of the moral and religious belief system.

Some third world countries have matriaricle societys, they believe in polyandry, the men are subsurvient to the women. Their society has functioned that way sucessfully for thousands of years because they adhere to the moral principals laid out.

So back to America, our laws reflect the major religious values that were intentionally established in the beginning.

So today a minority group (gay and lesbians) want to change major laws for them. Tommorrow it will be groups who believe in pedofilia (they already exist) wanting laws to protect them, then Beastiality and so on. So where does it end????? If you think this is redicolous then you need to do some research on the pedofile groups.

So if a society constantly changes it's principals and values to meet all the needs of a minority the country eventually the country ends up dissolving.

So this is where it ends, it ends by not starting, not starting to appease every minority group regarding issues that redefine the nations laws.

Husband and Wife Intimacy of American Fork @C.R. - C.R. If you want to make a real statement in a community direct it to the little town of American Fork.
They allowed an adult store in their city for Husbands and Wives. Don't you find that a little bigoted?

Chris and his wife started up the shop and slid it through city council. Yes in the very heart of downtown you can witness a mild sex shop. Let it be known that there is very little shopping to be found by Gays and Lesbians at the shop. Is it because they are not Husbands and Wives? You tell me why not one Gay Rights group in Utah has gone after the shop. You would think they would since they do not sell to that community.

C.R. - Are You Referring to ..... @C.R. - ......"Don't ask and don't tell". People who deviate from the sexual norm are not accepted as equals in the US military. Equal protection under the law does not apply to holy matrimony which has it's foundation in religion. To say the same sex unions are equal to marriages between one man and one woman is to stare reality in the face and deny it.

Most any child can tell you what nature intended and what is supposed to go where.

C.R. The Homosexuals Were Perfectly Happy To Vote ...... @C.R. - ...... on Prop 8 while they were ahead. Now that the folks in California have made their will known at the ballot box the losers want to throw temper tantrums. You need to stand up and take your loss like a man.

And how is this known? @Bob C. - It's my undersdtanding that they encouraged members to donate to the effort, but how do they know how much were donated by Mormons versus any other faith. Did they ask people what religion they were when they donated???

Ask the IRS @DarkStar - All the $$$ donated will be written off (California and Utah) as tax "deductible"! How many checks will say "LDS"

Hmmmm.. @2'l man - I hadn't thought of that. Not that I agree with your assumption about LDS on the checks, but are donations to this type of activity tax deductible?

tax deductible donations @SoJoBoy - Donations to campaigns are not tax deductible. I'm a politician and know this from experience.

Thank you..... @eclark - for the answer. That didn't seem right to me.

Donations are not tax deductible. @2'l man - I donated 50 bucks, but there is some threshold at which the donation must be reported to the state of CA. 50 bucks is under the threshold... I know this because the website I went to when I donated said so.

I can't deduct any part of my donation and would not expect that. This is not a charity; it's a political proposition.

And @DarkStar - Did the gay and lesbian community collect money from their members as donations? What is the difference? Both sides of this issue raised money for their cause and now that one side lost they are calling fowl.

HUGE SUMS of cash came from HOLLYWOOD. @Paul P. - It was well publicized that Steven Spielberg, and Barbara Streisand and many many other Hollywood Celebs in and out of CA donated big time, cash and thier time for fundraising against CA proposition 8. There was just as much funding on both sides.

Here you go... @Al - Barbara Streisand and others
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1078505/Barbra-Streisand-host-stars-support-gay-marriage-campaign-California.html

Steven Speilberg and others
http://www.looktothestars.org/news/1267-steven-spielberg-says-no-to-proposition-8

Apple Computer
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10074793-37.html

Google Cofounders
http://www.mercurynews.com/samesexmarriage/ci_10795816

So Basically @Al - The smart creative people were against Prop 8 and the superstitious religious people were for it . Got it .

Ned McHaggis @Ned McHaggis - Wait isn't Speilberg a Jew? Aren't the Jews for Prop 8? Blanket statements don't work either way. Mormons are bigots, Catholics are bigots, Jews are bigots, Gays are bad parents, Gays have AIDS and die, Gays are promiscuous and unfaithful. None of which are true.

Donations @Paul P. - Many church donated to the no group. Not only did they receive donations but endorcements from the California Teachers association, LA School District, and others.

where's the source @Bob C. - where is the sourece of this information on how much LDS people donated? What a lie to justify and promote their venomous attacks!

Satan knows no boundaries, and he has full control over a lot of people right now. He is not hiding anymore either.

Apple Inc. Protest @Bob C. - Maybe Mormons should go to Cupertino, CA and protest outside of the Apple headquarters because they donated $100k to those against prop 8.

Why? @Paul Revere - That was their constitutional right to do so. Why should we protest that?

Protest @MisterRockets - and LDS chruch members have the constitutional right to do so. Why is the LDS Church being protested? Poor losers I would say.

$100k ?? @Paul Revere - Thats Chump change compared to the 2 million the LDS gave up!

Why? @Paul Revere - It didn't do them any good! With all of the REAL problems in this country right now...That money could go a long ways to help people who really need it!

Get the facts straight. @Bob C. - The LDS Curch did not give 50% of themoney to support Prop-8. It gave les then $3000 to cover travel expenses of a few General Authorities.

Memebrs of the church gave a lot of money, but so did Catholics and other religious people.

besides, the people donating money didn't have to declare their religion so where are you getting your figures from AND are you subtracting the amounts that members gave supporting the anti-prop-8 cause?

members gave money? @dgr - theres always a loophole isnt there.

But correct me if Im wrong, A church is made up of a "people" otherwise its nothing more than a building.
Therefore the LDS church gave 2 million!!

and besides, the most money came from the LDS church thats why you stand out more than the rest! not to mention most of whining came from the LDS too!!

@Black Blood - Well, by that logic, since the state of california is not necessarily the boundries of the state but the government and the people in the state. I can make the argument for population for you receive more House of Reps. because of it, and since those people gave money for it, then the state of California directly supported the proposition, right?
Whining, I guess I haven't heard any gays whining, like Melissa Ethridge said she is now not going to pay her state taxes anymore and said that Ellen D. shouldn't either, and that she voted for Obama so she could get more rights.

Money,... @Bob C. - I think the money isssue is just an easy blame for a group of people needing someone to blame...
Obama raised over $600mil for his campaign- where did all of that money come from??? Should we track down it's religious ties???

where did all of that money come from??? @P T. - it came from terrorist abroad! dont you read the news!

Like the LDS, Obama is a negative member of society!

Apple Donations @Bob C. - Hmmm,,, Doesn't everybody know that Apple donated $1, million bucks to the No on Prop 8?

All the God Fearing people should then protest Apple. This makes me mad. The media is not mentioning this, when In the gay community I got an email with the article.

You want to talk about MONEY? @Bob C. - Money poured in from EVERY state in the union to support a NO vote on prop 8. This was reported on an ABC TV station in Los Angeles.

@DJC 47 - all I know is: all that donated money just made some politician rich! What a waste!

Money and the Mo church @Bob C. - If the Mo Church wants to "spread it's wealth" via their Propaganda, I can think of a zillion better ways they could spend it. And do so in a no questions asked, no requiring the recipient to be a member.

A few suggestions: Feed the hungry in our own backyard, help homeless people find quality affordable housing, work toward ensuring everyone has access to quality health care at an affordable cost, make sure no man/woman/child has to go without warm coats and winter protective clothing, etc.

If they are contributing money to a political cause, wouldn't that then make them a political lobbyist, which they claim to not be.

So which side of the fence do they want to be on? A non-biased religious organization, or rich corporation with funds to influence political decisions?

read Hamilton comment @Bob C. - Kevin Hamilton post comment on other article giving details.

The gay coalition outspent pro-Prop 8 coalition - 38 millions to 32 millions.

2.4 percent of pro Prop 8 votes were LDS. The rest of other church groups made up the rest of the votes.

The stark difference can be noted..... those who supported the Prop 8 are church-going (Hispanic Catholics, Black Baptists & Evangelicals, etc.

fewer whites going to church while much higher percent of blacks and latinos do, hence the disparity -

The HARD question must be asked, why isn't the gay coaltion picketing the hispanic Catholic Churches, black Baptist Churches, even NAACP offices, since they made the overwhelming majority of the voting bloc in support of Prop 8?

Doesn't the Book of Mormon @wilco64256 - refer to the catholic church as "The [removed] of babylon and "the great and abominable church?" I guess that enemies of your enemies are your friends in times like these.

IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION----- @Supernurseboy - No it does not.

Feel free to look it up yourself, but no it does not. It only gives a description of "a Church", which could be any Church, that loses sight of their own beliefs for something else. Possibly with the same things that Satan tempted Jesus with in the desert while he was fasting.

Even members of the Mormon Church who find themselves apostate from their own beliefs could be members of this "Church" Looks like some mebers have on this issue.

Which is a really good point. Be true to your beliefs and don't sell out under pressure.

All false systems of worship @Ambiguous brother - This has been interpreted by Church leaders to mean any false system of worship or power including even political organizations and even communism.

book of mormon, 1 nephi @Supernurseboy - "save two churches only" the church of the Lamb of God and the second is the church of the devil. The great and abominable church. And i quote "gathered multitudes to fight against the the Lamb of God"

book of mormon 1 nephi

I always thought in was... @Y_13-0_08 - The Muslims or some alternative to Christianity. It doesn't say Catholic ANYWHERE!!!

@Supernurseboy - dont under estimate the Power of the Catholic Church!

Your view is too simplistic @wilco64256 - Mormons had a bigger influence than their population percentages because the Mormon Church and individual members donated so much money to the campaign to deny equal protection to a select group of Americans. You can't simply look at the percentage of Mormons in the population and get the full picture.

Without the Mormon involvement, do you think Prop 8 would have passed?

You are correct that Mormons would remove many more individual rights and freedoms of others if it weren't for the US Constitution. It is the US Constitution that keeps Mormons from removing people's civil liberties in Utah. When unchecked, the LDS Church is VERY willing to mess with people's rights. Thank goodness and reason for the wise Founding Fathers who added the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution.

CR you are not being rational... @C.R. - It doesn't matter who donates what and how much in an election as long as the amounts do not violate any laws.

You are sour because they lost. Targeting the Mormons just shows how irrational the other side is being.

It was a fair fight. One side will always loose.

We have a great country with a system in place to create laws or revoke them. Your explanation does not make any sense when we apply the laws.

Huh? @America Forever - "It doesn't matter who donates what and how much in an election as long as the amounts do not violate any laws."
When those opposed to Prop-8 decided where to target their after-election protests, it was VERY rational to consider how much the LDS Church contributed. How can you say that it is irrational to protest against the largest contributer? Did you think about what you were saying AF?

You seem to be defending your Church against a claim I did not make. I did not say the LDS did not have the right to donate money or participate. I am explaining why the LDS Church is taking extra heat on the issue. I think they deserve to be protested. I see this very much like the protests over civil rights in the 1950-60s South.

It is not irrational to target an organization for protest that certainly ensured the passage of the Proposition by their disproportional contributions. Again, I am not saying this is illegal. I don't accept their position (I find it immoral and bad), but I am not saying they don't have the right to hold it.

I am sorry that Prop 8 passed, but I am not surprised, and I am not that broken up, because I believe bigotry is slowly dying out. Anti-gay prejudince is the last major bastion of bigotry in this country. Things are going in the right direction, and with Obama in the Whitehouse, I have hope that things will get better generally. I plan on dedicating myself to being more charitable, but no more tolerant of bigotry.

Was it a fair fight? The pro-Prop 8 side spread a lot of silly lies, but that is part of the game in American politics, and smart people were able to see the lies for what they were. We smart people still lost:)
Three minutes on scopes.com showed how many fear-based lies were being spread.

I agree we have a great country and I celebrate the peaceful process we have, but I don't even know what your last sentence means in the context of what I wrote. I do appreciate that you are a gracious winner, but I also celebrate the protests, if they are peaceful. I am sooo grateful for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Can you imagine how bad it would be if anyone who isn't a Religious Right Christian had to rely on the fairness and goodness of the pro-Prop 8 crowd? Sure we can imagine it. It was called the dark ages. Ahh the Enlightenment.

This is not a church issue....it is a MORAL issue. Church’s, People, Groups have a right to stand up for morality. @BYUROCKS - GAY MARRIAGE DESTROYS THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE: "In Sweden, gay couples and marriages are legal. The divorce rate among gay men is 50 percent higher than the heterosexual divorce rate. For lesbian women, the divorce rate is 170 percent higher. The effect of these divorces is significant. These high rates of divorce lower cultural esteem for marriage."

Another thing to consider with these gay rights is HIGH RISE IN HEALTH CARE COSTS Aides was first introduced by the gay people. Soon after heterosexuals and other innocent people became infected, so now it is not just a gay disease anymore. Thanks to the gays, it is now a disease that does not discriminate. Gay men have 52% higher infection rate of hepatitis than the general population does. By legalizing gay marriage it would thereby increase health care costs for all. This would effect the majority of people, and not just the minority for gay marriage anymore.

Unbelievable! @BYUROCKS - I am glad he is supporting the church. I can not believe how vindictive the leaders of the gay activist communities are being right now. There is talk to boycott Utah companies and the Sundance Film Festival,(obviously have no ties to LDS Church).

This yahoo in Washington DC (John) who is the editor on Americablog.com is the one pushing this. Hey idiot: No wonder your not getting support for change you big freakin vindictive baby. He is blaming Utah mormons for the loss on prop 8. He is trying to find info on the biggest companies in Utah and drive them out of business, (good luck).

I am disgusted with SOME of the gay community who has lashed out to members of the church who had nothing to do with this. You are losing support and making yourselves look bad by vandalizing churches, temples, houses and even beating people up.

Should I go down to Castro in SF and start burning shops and beating the crap out of gays? Whats the difference? This is sad.

just to be sure... @none88 - The last sentence in my statement is sarcasm. I would never lower myself to that level. Trying to make my point.

Maybe I shouldn't say this.... @none88 - ...but maybe this hissy fit they are throwing is a good thing in a way. I think a LOT of the nation is watching and waking up to the true nature of the gay agenda. No matter what, it will not bode well for them in the end.

ha ha... @none88 - you want to talk about giving somebody to much credit...there is no way these people could pull off a boycott that huge....thats laughable...

@BYUROCKS - Well, when you have the POWER of the Catholic Church on your side, miracles happen!

Not just once @OLD_SCHOOL - This type of vote didn't pass just once in California -- this is essentially the second time!

If you want to add to the "fairness" of it . . . 10 million people can't be wrong twice -- can they?

These people are disgusting professing love..... @drkpa - showing "HATE"!

I'm Sure they @B Happy 4 Ever - "Profess" thier love to the LDS Church. Why wouldn't they, Doesn't the LDS reciprocate??

I disagree @OLD_SCHOOL - It's a vote to restrict the rights and liberties of other people based on superstition. It is on par with people in the south voting to disallow Mormons to proselytize in their communities in the name of tradition.

No. It's not. @Rotorblade - Until the Supreme Court of CA overturned a law that was passed on a ballot measure by the citizens of CA, based on a non-existent clause in the state constitution, marriage was only recognized in CA between a man and a woman. These Judges said that anyone could marry anyone in CA. However, the constitution does not give judges the power to create law, only interpret it. In the vacuum resulting from the finding that Prop 22 (was it?) was unconstitutional, the only situation that should have existed was the situation that existed before Prop 22 was passes: which was, that only men and women could get married in CA.

It was the CA Supreme Court that said that gays could get married. The Supreme Court does not have the authority to do this.

Prop 8 was placing an amendment into the CA State Constitution (the most amended constitution on the planet, by the way,) in order to prevent just this sort of thing from happening again, and to represent the views of the majority of Californians (not just the LDS ones) that Marriage should be restricted to between a man and a woman.

So where does that leave gays? With domestic partnerships, which carry most, if not all the rights of marriage. I've heard arguments that "straight couples can go to Vegas and get married and go to any state and have all their rights recognized, but I and my partner can't." This is both true and untrue at once. Some States are joint property states, some are not. Some states recognize common law marriages, some do not. The laws regarding the rights of married couples vary somewhat from state to state. So do the laws regarding domestic partnerships.

Instead of spending all this money to usurp marriage and change its definition to something that it has never meant anywhere at anytime, maybe they should focus on securing transferable rights under a domestic partnership.

That doesn't sound the same to me @Rotorblade - And the biggest difference is that if a community votes not to let LDS missionaries proselytize, Mormons don't pitch a hissy fit about it, talking boycott and protesting etc. I think, if anything, this election has shown who is most gracious and respectful when they lose -- not the democratic party, not the gay rights people.

People are objecting to the constitutional rights of Mormons. Suck it up, you lost this time. We respect you when we lose.

HOW MANY @OLD_SCHOOL - HOW MANY LITTLE BOYS DID THIS FREAK HURT?

GOD HAS MORE GAY CHILDREN THEN LDS FOLLOWERS!!!

1% MORMON
12% GAY

1 MORMON = 2300 GAY PEOPLE!

[Please don't shout with ALL CAPS.]

12% Gay? @sugarhouseleo - Really?
Or does that mean that up to 12% have had a homosexual experience?

1% Mormon? Actually, more like 0.03%. Or 0.0075% if you count the entire world's population and use real church attendance numbers.

BTW, 90% of all statistics are made up. And 100% of your comment is stupid.

lott @Lott - The truth hurts I know. Sorry about your luck.

How many under age kids have you taken advantage of?

90% of all statistics are made up? Isn't that a statistic?

It's obvious you need another cheese burger!

Nobody's born a bigot. It's taught in the church....

Apollo @Apollo - YOU are such a dink....get over it YOU GUYS and YOU PEOPLE LOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@Thecatsmeow - Just as those fighting for civil rights lost a few battles.

@Rotorblade - You are comparing the right for a gay person to say he is 'married' with the right of an African American to say he is free, and the right for women to say (and feel) that they are equal? No way Dude....

@King Odin - I agree that the freedom from being a slave and equal protection under the law provided through marriage are not equal in all ways, but this is a sufficiently valid comparison in that they both involve the denial of equal protection to a select group, and they are both hateful and bigoted acts. Your superstitious-based bigotries are causing suffering for real people.

Again C.R Check yourself @C.R. - You sound so sure that this was all about equal rights but where was the ACLU? Their president is a gay male and they were not involved.

Guess they knew the amendment had NOTHING to do with "RIGHTS".

Check yourself.

It had everything to do with denying equal protection @Huklebry - The ACLU has already filed a petition against Prop 8. If they don't think it is an issue about rights, why have they already filed a petition? Maybe I'm not the one who needs to check myself:)

http://aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/37706prs20081105.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-gaylegal6-2008nov06,0,5471913.story

"The petition charges that Proposition 8 is invalid because the initiative process was improperly used in an attempt to undo the constitution's core commitment to equality for everyone by eliminating a fundamental right from just one group – lesbian and gay Californians. Proposition 8 also improperly attempts to prevent the courts from exercising their essential constitutional role of protecting the equal protection rights of minorities."

I don't know if they will prevail, but I think they are in principle correct. I am aware of the various ways this issue can be viewed, and you are right that I am sure this is about the denial of equal protection to a select group. I have heard other arguments, but I don't find them convincing. I'm still listening and open however, but don't expect lame, faith-based bigotries and superstitions against gays to persuade me. Most of these arguments come from immoral positions that are not founded in sound, self-evident principles.

Regardless, what I think doesn't really matter. What matters is what the court thinks and also what the people think. It is a balance. I think the blatant denial of equal protection takes this beyond a majority-rules situation. The minority sometimes must be protected from the majority by the court.

The Supreme Court probably doesn't agree with me right now. I would wait to file suit if I were the ACLU and others concerned with equal protection. I would wait until we have a more balanced court. We currently have three rabid religious right justices. It isn't the best time to push a case for civil rights up to that level in my opinion. Unfortuantely, neo-Conservatives don't care about civil rights for individuals anymore. They care about corporate rights and state rights (the states' right to deny individual rights that is). Barry Goldwater was for individual rights. What has happened to your party people?

I personally think the suit against Prop 22 was just, but I don't know if it was helpful strategically for the cause of equal protection. Regardless, I do think that eventually the courts will see this for what it is--blatant denial of equal protection to a select group. The Supreme Court is not set up to do anything yet, but after a couple of replacements by President Obama and it could be.

Also, I think a propostition that reverses Prop 8 will pass in California before long. Gays are no less worthy of respect and love and equal protection than you people are. It is about your behavior towards others, not your sexual orientation. When will you all catch on to this fundamental self-evident truth? Wrong is about exploitation and causing unnecessary suffering, not one's sexual orientation. Stop dehumanizing gays and treating them in shallow, stereotyped ways.

What? @C.R. - I'm a bigot because I don't think that gays should be married? And you really equate their cause versus the causes of African Americans and Women? When it comes to spewing hate, your posts speak volumes.

@King Odin - I don't assume that not wanting gays to have equal protection is NECESSARILY based in bigotry; but many of the posts I have read defending the proposition have been based in religious superstition and bigotry. Do you know what bigotry means? Or are you just reacting to how harsh it sounds in our PC world?

And yes I do think this is a civil rights issue and that there are valid comparisons among the denial of equal protection to blacks, women and gays. There are differences, but they are similar enough to justify the comparison. I don't much care if you all think this is hate. I have read the attacks against civil rights protesters in the 50's and 60's and they sound oh so familiar. They were accused of the same things. Yes, these causes are VERY similar. I believe that some day we will look back at this period and wonder how so many could be so bigoted against gays. They are no less worthy of love and respect. The dehumanizing of gays is bigotry. Not all do it, but many do.

except... @Rotorblade - its not immoral to be black or a woman...

@Annie B. - Prove that it is immoral to be a homosexual? Religious texts do not count because our government is not ruled under theocratic law.

Hey Appollo @Apollo - NOBODY is born GAY either, IT IS LEARNED. Do you think God was confused when we were created??????? I DONT THINK SO.

Apollo @ToteGote - AMEN ToteGote!!

We've seen this before @Apollo - That's the kind of talk that drove us out of New York. . .and Ohio. . .and Missouri. . .and Illinois. . .and Iowa. .

LOL @rodan32 - Can't get break!!!

Wow... @Apollo - Apollo, what a great example you are of the open-mindedness, tolerance, and acceptance you are. You're so right, all those mormons are shoving their hate down your throat. Your comments are soooo caring and not hateful it amazes me. Congratulations on making yourself look like the biggest idiot on this board and losing all credibility you may have had.

Correction... @belige35 - I meant to say the open-mindedness, tolerance and acceptance you and all these protesters have.

get out @Apollo - since you don't like us, get out of our state! If we are so bad, then leave, now!

What a bunch of whining babies! I love how tolerance and love are preached by the homos, but practiced only as long as it is directed at them. Since when is tolerance and love a one way deal?

nothing but sore losers!!!

ha ha ha ha ha @Redbaron13 - HEY RED BARRON, you get a little kick out of calling people hommos don't cha.

No, he never called anyone a hommo. @Apollo - He called them homos. He spelled it correctly. Just as he spelled "baron" correctly.

I don't call them either, BTW. I prefer the more colorful vernacular...

who is narrow minded @Apollo - The homosexual community is the most narrow minded group I have ever seen. maybe you should practice what you preach and you live your narrow minded life and leave the world alone rather then trying to convince us that somehow being gay is normal. Just go bite a pillow and you'll feel better in the morning.

Troll away

@ToteGote - It's "LEARNED"??? That is the lamest thing I have ever heard! What, is there a homosexuality 101 class being held at the Blue Oyster Bar?

Oh yeah, and your empirical evidence for god is...?

LOL @Rotorblade - I had the same reaction. I did wonder when "Totegate" learned to be straight!!!

@Rotorblade - " It's "LEARNED"??? That is the lamest thing I have ever heard! What, is there a homosexuality 101 class being held at the Blue Oyster Bar? "

It IS being taught in the schools in Massachusetts because it was passed back there and now has to be taught as normal. and yes I know this for a fact because I moved out of Mass. I/We Lost that vote so I moved. ( sounds like a common theme posted on these boards ( "don't like it move" )

Come on! @FroggyFotos - Do you really beleve that? And do you expect us to believe you moved because it "has to be taught as normal." Marraige 101 (gay or straight) is not taught in any school.

If you moved for that reason. Why don't you trust your children, they know (as well as you) if they are gay or straight!!

@2'l man - It is not the ONLY reason I moved but it is a reason, my kids are not in school yet but i don't want them taught it is ok.
Goggle "teaching homosexuality" it is being taught

In Provincetown, Mass., the school board has voted to begin teaching preschoolers about homosexual lifestyles and to back hiring preferences for "sexual minorities." Susan Fleming, superintendent of Provincetown schools, said "The whole question is making gays and lesbians, whether through visuals or examples or acknowledging different family structures, ... visible."

Funny how they removed prayer and religion from schools but can introduce this.

Preschool! @FroggyFotos - That's a MAJOR reason I would move out of ANY state. To know that MY 3-4 year old Daughter would have to "LEARN" about the possiblity of Cinderella not going for the Prince but, the PRINCESS!! HOLY COW! Anybody that had kids would protect them from this.... especially ones so young. Thanks for your insight FroggyFotos!

homosexualtiy taught in school @2'l man - check it out. Its all right here.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54420

Here is a video @2'l man - More evidence that it will be taught in all states if this kind of legislation is passed in all states. I would move too FroggyFotos. And to 2;l man, check your facts. And yes. I do believe it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puI4pfRB0w0

check it out @FroggyFotos - Parents don't even get notification when they are taught "diversity" in school. This kid was in Kindergarten.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puI4pfRB0w0

Rotorblade @Rotorblade - No, but Abnormal Psychology 360 does.

EEHHH @Rotorblade - Quote:(Oh yeah, and your empirical evidence for god is...?)

The universe!

@Hooda - That wasn't god, it was the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

That begs the Question @Hooda - of who or what created this God that supposedly created the universe

Do you think God was confused when we were created??????? @ToteGote - then explain the retards, the Downs Syndromers, people born with no limbs, people born with extra parts, and people born joined together! There was something very wrong in the creation batter with those folks and the same is true with Gays, they are born with some very mixed hormones/genes! You just cant teach that sort of thing!!

black blood... @Black Blood - Perhaps He had other reasons for sending them here....like what other people could learn from them, or how other people would treat them,....or perhaps what other people would call them.

I believe we are all here for a reason. We will learn and grow and answer for our actions.

That is slightly inaccurate.... @ToteGote - First off... passing prop 8 was a good thing not only for california but for the world; due to the publicity it received. "Everyone" was watching. Marriage only between a man and a woman is very sacred and not to be trifled with.

Now, in response to the notion that all homosexual individuals have learned their sexual orientation has been shown to be incorrect. Some, not all, have a condition while growing as a fetus where a portion of the brain is subject to varied amounts testosterone. This is caused by either extreme stress on the mother which denies testosterone or intake of excessive test. by the mother which supplies an excess to the fetus. There is a "grayish" spot which forms as a result. The spot is usually the same size in males and a different size in females. With the hormone variance the fetus' development may be altered to exhibit traits of the opposite sex. Thus, a male born with female tendencies or a female born with male tendencies. Once again I stress that this is some not all. This is slightly more seviere than a baby born with drug dependencies, and slightly less than one born with down syndrome.

As a result, SOME individuals in the homosexual community suffer from a condition that cannot be helped. In the future tests may be made available to detect and remedy this condition while in the fetus' developmental stages.

So where did you learn... @Apollo - ...to be a bigot Apollo? It obviously wasn't in church. Parents?

Correction @Apollo - I've seen a number of born-bigots on tv and marching outside LDS temples the past little while!

next god is going to strike us all dead for believeing in a non religious way of life!!

hey its my two cents @sherridempsey - are you going to vote me out of the country?

Can we? @sherridempsey - Is that an option? ;-)

@drkpa - already convinced. :D

im @sherridempsey - waiting.........amazing how dead the phone lines are on a friday night

depends - @sherridempsey - Are you here illegally? Then yes, I'll vote to send you home. Otherwise, say whatever you want, it's a free country.

Read the Full Statement Reading the full statement is well worth the time. His comments about "intolerance" are very insightful, indeed!

I have wondered why the opponents of Prop 8 have singled out the LDS Church? I know they say it is money, but the percentage of California residents that are LDS is very small -- at least it doesn't even approach the 52% that voted in favor of Prop 8.

Why aren't these people protesting in front of Catholic Cathedrals and Jewish Synagogues?

@drkpa - The answer is simple.. the LDS church is a easy target and people like to blame them for everything.. People voted and it passed.. LDS church may of been proud it passed and encouraged it, but so did every other religion. When its all said and done it came down to the voters decisions and obviously they felt like it was the right thing to do.

Even Simplier @OLD_SCHOOL - The LDS Church painted themselves as a target when they publicly funded (20 mil or more) and actively campaigned for limiting civil rights.

The LDS church @2'l man - Didn't provide one cent of funding for the campaign. Not one teeny tiny penny. Members of the church who felt strongly about it provided time, energy, and money. So did members of other churches. And I bet the money on the opposing side (while very poorly managed and used) came from people who felt strongly on that side as well.

Was it @wilco64256 - a tax write off?? What was on the "Pay to" line??

The 50 I gave @2'l man - was not tax deductible. This was not a charity... its a political proposition. By the way, I never heard from the church... I only know where I stand on this issue. I spend my own nickels, thank you, and I'm glad to join with the Mormons to help out on this issue.

@Al - Come on Al, be honest. I am 9000 miles from Utah and I'm not LDS and I heard from the Church. If you didn't hear the Church telling members to take action on this issue, then you are in a coma.

@2'l man - The Church did not fund the money, it was not tithing money the money came from members of the church from their own pockets (not thru a tithing slip and sent into church headquarters) along with many other people of different faiths. Where do you think those who oppose the prop got there money? Did they print it themselves? They recieved funds from celebrities and believe it or not other faiths and had the backing from other religions. Its funny how they keep saying sepration of church and state and keep religion out of it but expect Churches to support them and force them to perform a marriage( in Massachusetts) but they sure excepted money from churches that are on their side.
It always seems to be one sided there way or whine until they get their way.

frogyfotos @FroggyFotos - If the Mo church didn't use their members' tithing to support their viewpoint financially, then where did the money come from to do so? They are a tax exempt entity, who pays little or no taxes, under the status of "Charitable" organization.

Do you actually have access or knowledge, factually of where and what the members' tithing is used toward? It's not what you believe, it's what can be proven openly and honestly with facts.

Do you know what your tithing is supposed to be used toward? You might want to do a little research and determine what your tithing is being used for. I can name a few sources, lucrataive salaries, stocks in corporatons, real estate holdings, book deals, etc.

So what?! @2'l man - So what if the mormon church had funded the ENTIRE yes on 8 campaign single-handedly?! Does their funding of the campaign negate the votes of 52% of California voters? I don't care how much anyone put into either campaign, it came down to the voters of California, and they have voted on this issue not once but TWICE. Get over it.

BTW, the No on 8 campaign spent more money than the Yes on 8 campaign. So if you think money spent on the Yes campaign is what caused prop 8 to pass, by that rational it should have failed.

2'1 Man @2'l man - What do you think about Spielberg spending $500,000? Should be target him as an undue influence? How about all the movies made with homo references? Should we as a Yes on 8 group have picketed them when the judges overrule the will of the people.

This country allows for opposing voices!!! There will always be a loser when an election happens..Thank God for this amazing country.

Easy target... @OLD_SCHOOL - ...looks like the Gays are doing to the Mormons what Hitler did to the Jews. Single out a religion and blame all their problems on them. Hitler kept repeating it until good people believed him. What has this country come to?

Exactly @DarkStar - Mormons are a soft target. Nobody much likes them. Many other churches don't consider them to be "Christian." They figure no one will stand up for them. They don't care that not only did Mormons send in thousands of dollars in support of Prop 8, Mormons also sent in thousands of dollars to defeat Prop 8.

Now we see the true colors of the GLBT movement. I haven't read any stories of people wanting to firebomb Planned Parenthood or NARAL after the proposed anti-abortion amendments failed in ND and CO. The Pro-life crowd just shook their heads in disbelief and started to regroup and reorganize.

However, within hours of the official word that Prop 8 was passed there were calls on gay blogs to "Burn their temples to the ground" and "burn their churches and tax the charred timbers."

The came for the Mormons,
and no one stopped them . . .

Additional info, just because @MisterRockets - One individual who was instrumental in the efforts to pass Prop 8 was a friend of mine who lives in CA. I came across one gay blog that not only identified him by name, but listed his work address and company name. This person was encouraging other gays to write to his company, threaten them with lawsuits, harrasing phone calls, etc. in order to get my friend fired. Then they were asking if they could find his home address.

This is not just or justice. These techniques are straight out of Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler and Mao's playbook.

This cannot be allowed to stand.

I suggest that any person or organization who is harrased, boycotted, threatened, etc. file complaints with the local and federal authorities (if it crosses state lines.) If it is targeted at a person because they are affiliated with the LDS church, it should be prosecuted as a hate crime. Furthermore, individual and class action civil suits should be layed at the doorsteps of each identifiable individual and every organization participating in this type of intimidation. And seek punitive damages, make sure it has at least 7 or 8 zeros after it.

Use their weapons against them. Irony is sweet.

Blah Blah!!! @MisterRockets - Hearsay, Produce the web address

Stalking @MisterRockets - I suggest you save that web page and have your friend look into stalking charges.

Nobody @DarkStar - is sending Mormons off to a concentration camp to be snuffed so your "analogy" if you can even call it that it incorrect. As far as the Germans being such "good people" they were not . Almost EVERY GERMAN was complicit in what the Third Reich was doing .Hitler was ELECTED Chancellor .Hitler could not have done what he did without the German people being anti semeic so please sotp with the "good people" stuff.

Example of Dignity In sharp contrast to the divisive behavior of the anti Prop 8 demonstrators, this religious leader's letter of solidarity is a desperately needed example of the kind of dignity emmulated by civilized people. Disagree without being disagreeable.

If those who are so vocal in singling out the LDS Church would conduct themselves in a manner that shows respect for themselves and for others, they might have some credibility.

"Disagree without being disagreeable" @longjohn1 - "this religious leader" calls the protesters bigots - there is plenty of hate from both sides. Including most of the posts on this board.

Quote:"Bigoted attacks on Mormons" Hmmm!!
How the tide has turned!!!

@2'l man - ...because there's never been bigoted attacks on mormons before?

Good FREEKING grief! The proposition passed because of the idiotic wording of the original supreme court decision. The people of the state DIDN'T want that decision upheld so they voted twice to get rid of it. Obviously us "little people" actually carry more weight that "celebrities"...

Give it up already! We live in a democracy...YOU LOST! I don't even think it's about morality as much as prrservation of religious freedom! Why should churches be forced to go against their basic tenents so as not to "discriminate" against gays and lesbians???

They shot themselves in the foot with threats of legal action etc.

Former head of Salt Lake Diocese comes to defense of LDS Church http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/databases/DallasMorningNewsBishops.htm#Weigand

It's about shagging time that someone actually comes to the defense of the LDS church.

Kudos to you Bishop!

The Only Homsexuals @irelandsbecs - this Bishop should be concerned with are the pederast priests in his diocese and keeping them away from the alter boys . Clean up your own church first Bishop and stop the denial of the problems in your own faith.

Nice to see that someone is willing to stand up for us besides ourselves. Shows class to not just bail and let the LDS take all the heat.

Thank you Bishop Weigand It is so good to see Bishop Weigand defend The church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Thank you again

Am I a little slow on the uptake tonight? @Pam Ann - Why is Pam Ann's post being voted "inappropriate" and "troll"?

I was wondering the same thing... @irelandsbecs - All I was giving is my gratitude. What is wrong with that!

I gave you a ditto on both of your posts @Pam Ann - Pam Ann, have a nice night !

Thank you for those dittos @irelandsbecs - Irelandsbecs, thank you!

It is because @irelandsbecs - Prop 8 opponents are voting against anything they don't agree with, no matter what it is.

BISHOP WILLIAM WEIGAND He has said that three accused priests remain on the job "because the allegations were not sustainable." But in one of the cases, the diocese paid the Rev. Vincent Brady's accuser $350,000 in 2000 to drop a lawsuit. Susan Hoey-Lees said that more than 20 years ago Father Brady molested her - beginning when she was 11 and continuing until she was 16. On one occasion when he was baby-sitting her, she said, her parents walked into her room to find the priest in bed with her. Both parents support her account. A diocesan spokesman said the presence of two witnesses was "damning," but that was outweighed by Father Brady's denial. The priest said he had no memory of being in the girl's bed or of baby-sitting her. The diocese spokesman also cited other factors - including that the parents did not complain at the time and that no one else had ever accused the priest. The parents said they regret not acting immediately. Bishop Weigand has refused to identify the other accused priests who are still working.

donsaidso @donsaidso - There are thousands of people marching around LDS temples who are every bit as immoral as the people listed in the statement you posted.

To yucaterco, @yucaterco - read the last line on the article. Better yet, "Bishop Weigand has refused to identify the other accused priests who are still working." How much credibility does anyone have that refused to identify child molesters that are active in the Catholic Church. Might as be a perpetrator himself,, and I am not saying that he is.

why whine dont be a utah hater. do your homework not all utahn's are gay hating mormons. Shop lds free!!!
hit them where it hurts!!

@jnuts - YES and especially boycott the Sundance film festival that will really get 'em. ( sarcasm )

Jnuts @jnuts - That was classic, Laughed my a__ off

Thank you, Bishop Weigand. Thank you, thank you. I've been waiting all day for this.

It is gratifying, but... could someone please tell him to get the name right? In his statement, he mentions "Mormons" and "LDS," which are understandable and acceptable, but when he says "Church of the Latter-day Saints" the tone of the statement lacks authenticity. Never does he mention the correct name of the church. Surely, Bishop Weigand knows about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, doesn't he?

Ugh... @stevest - Can't you just be happy that he DID come to the church's defense???? Let's get technical. For the love. For the decades that we were taught in seminary that the Catholic Church was the "[removed] of the earth in her scarlets" can we not cut THEM a break already? He makes a statement in the LDS churches defense after years of the LDS church slamming the Catholic church and YOU complain about technicalities. Talk about whining. Be grateful for a consideration most would think you DONT deserve from a religion you have slammed for years and SHUT UP already.

It is true, as they argue, that gay marriage will not harm my marriage. For me, that is not the issue.

To endorse gay marriage is to contribute to the moral decay of our society (assuming one believes homosexual relations to be immoral). I am interested in keeping our society as morally strong as possible, for as long as possible. It is hard enough for our children today; what will it be like for the next generation, or the one after that?

Necessary, but insufficient. @Beatus - Orson Scott Card wrote a masterfull essay on this subject. I commend it to anyone openminded enough on the topic to read it. He pulls few punches, and explains not only why marriage must be protected, but the end result if it is not.

http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-02-15-1.html

link @MisterRockets - that was aweesome, thanks for posting it. What a great site!

Weigand comment right on the mark, but not widely heard. His comments validate the truth that many people of religion were involved in the passage of Prop 8, and gay activists are performing acts of bigotry.

You will see his letter mentioned on news for SLC, but I have been watching news sites in Sacramento, San Francisco, and LA and they make no mention of this this letter.

Sac is silent, SF is glorifying peaceful demonstrations in the Castro, and LA is cheering on protests of the Hollywood types.

It is also reported here @explorerman - MarketWatch of Wall Street Jounal:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Former-Catholic-Bishop-Salt-Lake/story.aspx?guid={BE149180-C54A-41B7-B3DC-14EAC89B5D6E}

BARRACK AND AFRICAN AMERICANS To figure out Prop.8 is not that difficult. Hmmmm Let's see the state is a strong blue state (Obama) but they voted in favor of Prop.8. African American voters came out in record numbers and are known to be socially conservative, great church going people. Is anyone putting this together? I know let's boycott something in Utah that has nothing to do with this issue!!!!

Nothing? @Esther R. - The LDS Church is headquartered in Utah so how do you say "nothing to do with this issue". Also why dont your get over this "blue state, red state" NONSENSE as Barack ( one r not two) said "We are the UNITED STATES". I highly doubt you even know any black people Esther so stick with what you DO know which is Relief Socity and voting for people like Chris Buttars.

Black and Latino Voters What's not been mentioned much is the role Black and Latino voters played in the passage of Proposition 8. Black voters sided in favor of Prop. 8 by margins of more than 2 to 1, and Black voter turnout was unusually large because of the candidacy of Obama for President. A majority of Hispanic voters also supported it. Blacks would certainly be a minority of LDS voters in California, and probably are not likely to be influenced strongly by anything the LDS church says. I suspect the situation might be similar for Latino voters in California. Yet nobody's out protesting against Blacks and Latinos in the passage of Prop. 8.

also... @Davew833 - obama is against gay marriage as well are they going to protest

Go to this page and look under Barrack Obama on civil rights...
hhttp://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Barack_Obama.htmim?

Protesting this him would probably at least get you a little farther than protesting the church...what do they think the people inside the church are doing... "oh no they don't like us?" They probably do the same as most of the rest of us and roll our eyes and say "are they serious?"

Thank you..... Bishop Weigand! your courage and integrity is much appreciated.

Sojoboy @SoJoBoy - Your right, this man has a lot of courage and integrity. The is evidenced by him refusing to release the three priests names that were molesting children in the Catholic church in a recent investigation.

Courage and integrity, yes, and now those priests have been transferred to other churches,, I am sure they stopped harming kids because they were relocated.

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/databases/DallasMorningNewsBishops.htm#Weigand

It's really too bad Christian faiths can't ban together more frequently on such issues. It seems to me that the vast majority of Christians keep 95% of the same moral standards. If we could all just support each other and quit fighting over minute details we could possibly turn this country around.

To Bishop William Weigand Thank you for your dedication to truth and honesty. Your voice tonight is greatly appreciated and makes me doubly happy to count my Catholic neighbors as friends with whom I would gladly share and whom I would gladly serve.

Thank you.

Bishop William Weigand, @B N. - Bishop William Weigand is someone that is a good man. While I don't agree with some of his beliefs, he has always tried to build unity and love. He is showing one more reason to respect him and one more reason we should show love for each other as children of God.

I would have voted to keep marriage between a man and women. I did when that was voted here.

Bishop Weigand Thank you for standing up for truth and right. I know that all faithful LDS peoples appreciate your forthrightness.

That's right Blame all those Utah Mormons.

It should be remembered a similar amendment was voted DOWN here in Utah.

I wonder who did that?

hmm... @MisterRockets - all the people against gay marriage perhaps?

I must say..... .....nice job, Padre'.

three questions Can someone answer three questions?

First, now that Prop 8 has been passed--what is the LDS Church's view and position on civil unions, which would provide rights and responsibilies for same-sex couples?

Second, will gay and lesbian Californians who wish to have a civil union be allowed to now that Prop 8 has passed?

Second, to what extent does the morality of a law compel the LDS church to voice its opinion and exercise influence in the political process? For instance, if there is a religious belief that alcohol is not permissable as it is a sin, does the church then act to see that made illegal or restricted from society.

My answers to your questions @rawiri - 1) The church doesn't condone any sexual activity outside of marriage. A civil union is not marriage. For benefits and tax purposes. Fine.

2) By who? The goverment? Depends on the state. By the LDS church? Don't count on it.

3) The LDS take a stance on moral issue when it is appropriate to do so. Alcohol is not allowed in the church. The local regulations are regulated by the state.

QUESTIONS OF MY OWN @rawiri - Where are all the gay religions in this controversy?

Do gay religions even exist?

Or are gay religions just Protestant religions that have some kind of added but formal spiritual basis or special theology just for gay people?

Do they use the Bible, the Koran, Dynetics or some other Holy Book as their basis for their marriages?

Can you give me an example of a gay marriage from one of these "Holy Books?"

Why do gay marriages base their marriages on heterosexual marriage?

Do gay marriages ever use the vows of fidelity and commitment or the words "Holy Matrimony"?

Or do they prefer non-religious weddings given by judges or other State elected officials?

What percent of gay marriages end in divorce?

Do any gay religions forbid divorce?

Do any forbid political involvement?

And I would please like to know the answers to these questions without a response from someone who is going to just make a joke about it.

my last question shouldn't say second; it should be my 3rd question I moved my 3rd question to being my 2nd and forgot to update that on the question.

I really need some sleep or some caffeine. Either way, I look forward to reading some responses hopefully.

Just an excuse... There are so many people that hate Mormons or members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This just gives them an excuse to freak out, point fingers, and judge. It is so much easier to jump on a band wagon and promote hate & wrong stereotypes. You mormon bashers have no idea what humanitarian services and love is given by so many people throughout the world who are members of this incredible church. Do some research -- see what took place regarding Hurricane Katrina and other disasters that have happened in this country and around the world. The members of this church that you hate so much, volunteered their lives to help & give to those who were affected by this tragedy. Loaded semi-trucks were brought in with food & supplies to help. Given to total strangers by volunteers. They weren't pre-qualifying who they gave it to. It was given to all in need. No one was judged or mistreated. Our church IS being singled out. It is because we are a perfect target for all of you that have so much hate in your hearts. If it is so painful to live in a state where the majority of people living here are people you don't like, why are you still here?

Also, @chilljillybean - if they hate us so much why do they take the humanitarian aid that we so freely give out? Humanitarian aid is given not only in major disasters but smaller scale ones as well, I’ve seen people who say nasty things about the church take food and clean up kits passed our with LDS church written all over them and as you said there is no pre-qualifying, we give it because it is needed and that is exactly what Jesus Christ would have us do.

If the vote had gone the other way..... Would there be the same backlash and protesting by the Yes voting folks and organizations? I kinda doubt it. Methinks today would be all quiet with perhaps internal discussions here and there.

I just can't get over the fact that with marriage today being tossed away via divorce and couples who simply don't want to commit and they end up living together....marriage seems to be no big deal. And yet gays are all up in arms over it all. What gives? It is as if their main focus is to force everybody else to notice. They want to force their adgenda on whoever isn't paying attention?? Help me out here.

Beautiful! Suck on this you protestors!!!! HAHA! chiljillybean you are SPOT ON!!!!! It IS just another excuse for people to hate the the church. It's just another way for satan to stir up the hearts of many against the cause of righteousness! GET OUT IF YOU HATE US SO BAD!!! We would be happy to see you leave so we don't have to hear your gay mess anymore! That RC Bishop is an awesome man for standing up for what he believes, and for his "brothers and sisters" in the LDS faith! Good for him! I am so fed up with these people i could be sick! Your protesting is all in vain! The amendment is still not changed and is not going to change! You still can't get married after tonight's riot downtown! Oh yeah, and go ahead and send all those letters and postcards promised to the lord's prophet because im sure that is going to change the amendment to. . . . or just fill up our landfills!!!! Get a life! You people are like a child who just got told they can't keep doing the wrong that they are doing so you are going to throw a tantrum now! GET A LIFE and GO HOME!

Credible Character Witness? I think Jesse Helms once defended Strom Thurmond against charges that he was a racist.

The Catholic Church is generally just as bigoted in their denials of individual protection under the law as the Mormon leadership, so their defense is not credible. In fact, it is laughable.

Neither organization has earned the right to accuse anyone of bigotry at this point. Their venomous anti-gay campaigns of lies, hatred and bigotry will eventually be an embarrassment to them. At that point both organizations leaders and blind-faith true believers will do what they have always done--the LDS will lie about their history, and the Catholics will ignore their history.

This is another example of how religion too often leads to moral relativism and causes real suffering to outcasts and shadow people (You remember them. Jesus hung out with them, and blessed them.).

Fortunately, I know many loving Mormons and Catholics who refuse to accept the morally retarded position to which blind obedience and moral relativism lead--these loving, brave, moral members were against Prop 8, and will vote to support equal protection when the issue is voted on again in the future.

I believe that eventually love and kindness will prevail, and the haters on this issue will have to go into the closet--unless fear drives people the other way--which is always a possibility.

Another fortunate thing is that we have a secular system of government that prevents religious zealots from having gays, witches, unbelievers, and disobedient children tortured to death. Remember the era when religion was in charge? We call it the Dark Ages. I'm sure you also know that the Bible Belt was the Lynching Belt, and that the Bible was used as a primary defense for slavery and against the fight for women's rights and women's sufferage.

If the Catholics are just as "bigoted".... @C.R. - why are they not being attacked as is the Mormons?

The gay movement is really showing how much it cares about other people as well. When you disagree with someone else...do you stand in their face and yell? I'd be curious to know or if you can point out if either the Catholics or Mormons went to such violent measure as the gay movement is doing now. Why?? What is your/their point? What ever happened to civil, productive discussion? Or...is is that gays simply want to be noticed when nobody is doing so?

gmemory @gmemory - How polite would you be if it were your civil rights being taken away? The LDS church has been publicly fighting gay marriage for several years now. They purchased the best propaganda that their money could buy and inundated the media to play on peoples fears and ignorance in Alaska and Hawaii. When their tax exempt status was questioned, rather than following the spirit of the law, they started asking members to donate money instead of financing campaigns themselves. Nice way for a church to act. What on earth makes you think that the church could wage this nasty campaign and the victims should just be nice and go away? The LDS church almost went to war with the US over polygamy. The catholic church's history is rife with violence and war. It is baffling that, in the name of Christ, many churches formed a coalition to deny their fellow man rights. The hypocrisy is stunning.

why are they not being attacked as is the Mormons? @gmemory - Its because the Catholic dont act like children that just had their candy taken away! The Catholics fight admirablely, not like a bunch of whining jerks!

The good folks who were against... Prop 8 sure haven't done much to clear up stereotypes or sway public opinion! We now know with out a doubt that they are a BIG BUNCH OF WHINEY A_S HOLES!

Frequently, the better informed you become about a spacific group, (who are different than you) the more you find that you can actually understand them and be supportive.

These people and their "supporters" are a bunch of spoiled babies. If they had gone about things the right way and not used threats about civil actions, I don't think churches would have felt the need to become involved on such a large scale. When you threaten that unless they are allowed to play their stupid games in our churchs as well as in front of a judge, and that we have to accept it or be punished, that changes the WHOLE picture!

Get over your selves already! You are abunch of publicity seeking [removed]! Work on laws for domestic partnerships...Put your money to use helping other people...I am all for you guys having rights, such as health insurance, survivors right's etc....JUST DON'T TRY TO TAKE MINE AWAY by making MY church go along with your stupid game!!!

Wow...such a language.... @Melanie M. - Why are you so angry? Nobody on the other side (officially) is that way to you... Or is the gay movment nothing but anger and nothing else? You guys keep talking about how you want to "love"...

It doesn't matter which religion I just don't like the Church (pick one, any one) telling people how to vote and spending dollars on issues like that when those dollars and efforts could be better spent on being more Christ-like and charitable. Yes I know both LDS and Catholic churches are very involved and give massive energy to social welfare. I am involved with both Churches, I know.

Life is good.... @Lifeisgood - Does that mean that any person with an affiliation to a church cannot have an opinion or participate in a political debate or help pass a law?

Do your homework. The Mormon people who participated pay taxes. The Church did not pass any law or donate as a church. They just asked the members to wake up and protect the definition of marriage.

If the church said wake up and start a petition for polygamy, do you think it would pass? NO! You see, the residents of CA voted 52% in favor of prop 8. I'll bet the residents would vote 99% against polygamy. The church is harmless. You just want to wail and gnash your teeth.

Teaching Prince marries Prince If you all are so against homosexuality because mostly of your Mormon belief, then why did you vote for Obama, Seems just a bit hypocritical doesn't it? At the end of the day he wants to teach sex education to our Kindergartners along with having to read Prince marries Prince but yet it was okay for you all to vote him in as President, and now we're all concerned about having gays and lesbians teaching our kids. We seem to have double standards in this state, one minute Mormons are appalled at Propostion 8 but yet vote for a candidate that if given the opportunity would have voted no for it. You people are so confusing with your beliefs. why was it okay to vote for a President that wants to force homosexuality down our young childrens throats, but yet you are all verbal against proposition 8.

Speedster, you assume things @67SPEEDSTER - First off, I did not vote for Obama

Second, if he is our president, I will support his policies if they do not promote homosexuality.

Prince marries a prince is not an appropriate book for children.

OH Speedster @67SPEEDSTER - Still whining about Obama. Look at it this way, had Obama not been the nominee then prop 8 might have been defeated given that 70% of blacks voted FOR Prop 8 with probably 95 % of blacks in CaLifornia voting for Obama IN RECORD NUMBERS .YOu really need to read up on things a bit more .

speedster Obabma's position on gay marriage is that he personally is against it, so is his wife, and so is the biden clan.

Support marriage I wholeheartedly support traditional marriages and families.

I also support same-sex marriages and their families. Support for one is not mutually exclusive for support of the other. When same-sex marriages are legal and Constitutionally protected, as they eventually will be, then traditional one man-one woman marriages will still constitute at least 90-95% of all marriages. Same sex marriages will do nothing to threaten nor diminish this cornerstone of society. Support for same-sex marriage is not support for the dissolution or legal sanction of traditional marriages. They will continue to flourish as the overwhelmingly predominant form of marriage and family.

Same-sex marriages will succeed or fail in about the same proportion as do traditional. They will be religious and sacred or secular in about the same proportion. They will raise healthy, well adjusted, loving, nurturant, empathic and responsible children in the same proportion.

There will be two major consequences which some people might consider untoward.

First, parents will have a harder time teaching their children that homosexuality is a grievous and heinous moral sin when they see their next door neighbors and their school mates to be essentially the same as they are.

Second, with the legalization of same-sex marriages, polygamous marriages will also eventually and unavoidably be legalized. Then, happy day, the Mormon Church can return to living completely and fully The New and Everlasting Covenant as per their Holy Scriptures. The Manifesto of 1890 was a political expediency and not Scripture, and can easily be reversed. Doctrine &Covenants 132 is still The Word of the Lord. The restricted polygamy that the Mormon Church practices today will no longer be limited to sequential Sealings to be fully realized as Plural Marriage in Heaven, but can return to the Pure and Holy Covenant in this life which the Lord God intended for his children and Only True Church.

Praise God!

Some important advice to men @Shelama - When the Church renews plural marriages, stick with marrying sisters.....it cuts down on the number of mothers-in-law.

What happens now The people that hurried and got married to their same sex mate, are they now legally not married?

funding If you go to this website:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-moneymap,0,2198220.htmlstory
You will see that those who were for same-sex marriage actually had more money than those against it. Can we really make this a money issue?
I believe it is a moral issue. To me it looks like the funding was equal. I would expect that that fact alone would equal equal covering of the issue in the media and voters were informed and voted because of their beliefs. The claim that the LDS church is messing in another state is bunk too. Look at the out of state/in state statistics. Looks fair to me.

Point-Counterpoint I noticed Gay supporters do not answer certain questions. i.e., why are you not protesting other churches? why are you tagging and desecrating the LDS meeting houses? What of your allegations that money came from the LDS church, which isn't true. Why ARE you targeting the LDS faith and Utah? What of the propositions in Colorado and Arizona that did not pass? Why does disagreeing with you make me a bigot, but when a person of ethnicity disagrees with you, you remain quiet and without comment? I did not donate money, nor did I make phone calls nor did I Vote for or against prop. 8 AS I LIVE IN UTAH, NOT CALIFORNIA. Why am I your target, why is my religion the target of your signs, speeches and actions?
Why are you okay with a Court decision but not okay with a Voter decision?
There are many things in this country I disagree with---i.e. Abortion, but I don't spew hate for those who have them and perform them.
You have a first amendment right to protest, but do so in the right manner.
The African American protests were NOT anti-white as much as pro-integration. They didn't tag churches and speak of hate. They marched and spoke of unity as was their right.
I agreed with that movement , but disagree with your movement. However, my guess is you will eventually have your marriages, just like abortions. Still, the law does not make you moral, it only accepts your immorality.

Howdy! .

The separation of all churches and state
A church should not influence any one on how to Vote

When it comes time for election all Churches should BUT OUT
They should stick to teaching the word of GOD!

When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some." Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun

Myth:
The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution.

That is true, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not actually appear anywhere in the Constitution. There is a problem, however, in that some people draw incorrect conclusions from this fact. The absence of this phrase does not mean that it is an invalid concept or that it cannot be used as a legal or judicial principle.

There are any numbers of important legal concepts, which do not appear in the Constitution with the exact phrasing people tend to use. For example, nowhere in the Constitution will you find words like "right to privacy" or even "right to a fair trial." Does this mean that no American citizen has a right to privacy or a fair trial? Does this mean that no judge should ever invoke these rights when reaching a decision?
Of course not

We would not have all the controversy and all the problems we have to day
If all the Churches would BUT OUT.

Religion is a privet thing and should be keep that way

Myth? @mean doggy - You call it a "myth", then immediately verify that it's true?

The Amendment says that Congress shall not "establish a religion", nor shall it "interfere with the free exercise thereof."

The same people who wrote that Amendment also established the offices of Senate and House Chaplains, and required that all sessions of Congress open with PRAYER. How do you wiggle your way around that one?

The Amendment forbids the establishment of an official State Religion. That's all it does.

As for your nonsense about rights to "privacy" and "a fair trial": Those issues are specifically addressed, though not by name. Habeas Corpus ring a bell? How about the right of petition, the prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment", jury trails, etc? What about the requirement of search and seizure warrants, and the "due process" clause?

Perhaps you should READ the Constitution.

@mickeyqbitsko - The Amendment forbids the establishment of an official State Religion.
Just what is the State Religion of UTAH???

State religion of Utah? @mean doggy - There isn't one. That you'd suggest otherwise merely verifies your bigotry.

A majority of Utahns happen to belong to the LDS Church. This being a democracy, it follows mathematically that a majority of our elected officials will be LDS as well. The only way to avoid that would be to FORBID Mormons from running from political office, or at least to limit the percentage of Mormons who can serve. How would you reconcile that with "democracy"?

A majority of elected officials from the Bible Belt are Baptists or other related religions. The Great Lakes region elects a lot of Lutherans. Catholics predominate in Massachusetts. So what? It stands to reason that the elected officials from a given state do (and should) represent the people of that state.

You don't have a counter-argument for my post, so you fall back on the standard liberal bigot rhetoric. Typical.

@mickeyqbitsko - A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding state of mind. Bigot is often used as a pejorative term against a person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices even when these views are challenged or proven to be false or not universally applicable or acceptable.

I am a bigot? or are you a Hypocriye @mickeyqbitsko - 1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
— hypocrite adjective

@mean doggy - I believe that the LDS Church should be like
Children
They should be seen and not heard

I love everyone.... I am a convert to the Church of over 30 years. I was born in San Francisco and lived there all my life. I have lived in Utah 2 years. I feel like I have seen it all and felt it all.I have very dear gay friends and very dear morman friends.I even have morman friends that have gay family members. I think as God is looking down on us all he would say love one another. I love everyone and I would say to all of you to stop the hate and mean words. So long as we can vote we should vote for what we believe what ever side we are on.We should not judge each other for what we believe. The World is changing Love You All.....

Agree @Sandra C. - I enjoyed your post. Most members want nothing more than to get along with everyone and most do. The problem is that members of the church have been rolled over time and time again. If members seem overly defensive about their position its because they have been discriminated so many times. The gay activists know this feeling which is why im surprised that they are doing as much as they are against the church.

Love the sinner, hate the sin @Sandra C. - I have gay friends. I certainly don't "hate" them. But I don't want them to be legally married, and I certainly don't want them raising children.

Being "tolerant" and "loving" doesn't mean that I have to blindly accept everything that everyone chooses to do.

I like how all this "tolerance" and "love" is only supposed to flow in one direction.

Marriage belongs to The People, and nearly six million of the People of California have spoken. Only about 1% of those voters were LDS. The vote was almost exactly 50/50 in Los Angeles County itself, which is not exactly known as a hotbed of right-wing conservatism, to say the least.

When you can convince a majority of the people in the most liberal state in the Union, it should be obvious that your values are wildly out of touch with society. How that is the "Mormon's fault" is beyond my meager comprehension.

Thank you To Bishop William Weigand,

Thank you.

well that is BIG OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH esp since they were the ones who ask the LDS TO GET INVOLVED IN THE FIRST PLACE, my question which isnt the GAY MOVEMENT PROTESTING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, the church this CARDINAL OR BISHOP IS AT. i think the gays are DISCRIMINATING ON THE LDS BECAUSE THEY HATE US. we should go PROTEST THEIR PROTEST FOR BEING HATERS of the LDS and not the catholics

MyOpinion4U... @MyOpinion4U - I actually agree with you for once. I'll tell you why they singled out the Mormon Church. It's because if they call out the Jews it's "prejudiced". They won't call out the Catholics because they're so numerous. They don't call out the Baptists because they fight back hardcore. They don't call out the Black or Hispanics because they'd get their a**es kicked. They think that 600,000 Mormons in CA and funds from members everywhere are to blame. Maybe they should look at 52% of the people around them. Gays (not all of course) are showing their true bigotry as of late. Look up AMERICAblog.com. They're trying to find records of individuals in Utah who donated to Yes of Prop 8. They threaten to come here and harass and stalk Utahns who donated. Can you imagine thousands of people dressed up like Liberace, Cher and Madonna coming here to look for a fight?

God Bless this man and all of those who support what God intends for marriage.

Good info for all http://www.preservingmarriage.org/videos.html


http://www.tips-q.com/content/so-who-funding-proposition-8