Crunchy Con

Stand by the Mormons

Tuesday November 18, 2008

A friend in California writes about the situation there for those who supported Prop 8:

Things are pretty grim. On the ground pastors are worried, and for my Mormon friends it is very bad. No LDS person in their right mind who is not a man of courage would announce his church affiliation without knowing it to be safe.

I am reminded of something John Mark Reynolds, the Biola professor, wrote right after the election:

Proposition 8 would not have passed if it had not been for LDS (Mormon) money and manpower. For their hard work as participants in the process, this small religious group received some of the worst attacks of the political season. They were demonized and stereotyped by opponents of Proposition 8 and sometimes by the mainstream media.

[snip]

Despite this fact at times a plausible Mormon presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, was the subject of unfair religious scrutiny. (Some forms of scrutiny of religion are fair, but some are just bigoted. Distinctions start here.) Too often people they have supported in the past were weak in their condemnation of such bigotry.

Republicans should not ask for Mormon money and manpower and then regulate their leaders to the backrooms when leadership roles are handed out.

Of course, nobody should confuse political and social agreement with theological unity.

My theological differences with the Mormon faith are deep and important. Within the last month I have argued that the LDS view of the God is not compatible with what we know about Divine love. Those theological discussions and disagreements must continue bringing clarity with charity to the important disagreements.

They are important because they are, after all about eternal things.

In the battle for the family, however, traditional Christians have no better friends than the Mormon faithful. It would be wrong if that support were taken for granted. We are intolerant of the false attacks on Mormon faith and family. We stand with our Mormon friends in their right to express their views on the public square. We celebrate the areas, such as family values, where we agree.

Now is the time for traditional Christians -- Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox -- to come to the aid of our Mormon friends. They put themselves on the front line of the traditional marriage battle like no other church group. And now individual Mormons are paying a terrible price for standing up for something we all believe in. I don't know how we can stand with them from afar, but at least we can thank them, and speak out when we see them being abused. We might also think again about how we view them. I'm with John Mark: I have deep disagreements with Mormon theology. But they are our friends and allies and fellow citizens, and they deserve our thanks and support.

Advertisement
Comments
SC
December 2, 2008 3:37 PM

Another thing. I think we probably have more in common theologically then we know. Reading C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity maid me realize our theological battle about the nature of God is sure to be answered in time.

Your Name
December 2, 2008 4:20 PM

Amazed,

(Well, I'm amazed at how much false witness can be born by people in the name of religion, considering doing so is a SIN.)

You ask: "[W]hy should religion ... need to be on the defensive?" I would ask the sme of you, since I was married in my church. What right have you to deny my freedom of religion?

You also falsely state, "it is not possible to take away a right that you never had. As I understand Prop 8, it seeks to codify that marriage is between a man and a woman. It does not take away non-existent rights."

Well, you definitely misunderstand it then, for what you wrote is quite false. The official wording of the Proposition is in its very title (which you also got wrong - it's not called the "California Marriage Protection Act"): "Proposition 8 - ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX" COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT."

Also, you must have not been informed about the decision by the California State Supreme Court that found the law prohibiting same-sex marriage to be UN-Constitutional under the equal protections clause. Since that decision, more than 18,000 same-sex couples have exercised their (very real) right to marry.

Prop 8 is likewise UN-Constitutional, and will be found so shortly. Besides, the Constitution cannot be single-handedly changed by a popular vote - it needs to be approved by 66% of the legislature. Heck, your side can't even get it right procedurally. So much ignorance to combat.

Amazed
December 2, 2008 6:58 PM

Your Name,

Actually, if you go online and read the ballot itself, you will see that it is called the California Marriage Protection Act. Do a little research, will you? Here is the full paragraph from California's voter guide:

PROPOSITION 8
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8, of the California Constitution.
This initiative measure expressly amends the California Constitution by adding a section thereto; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.

SECTION 1. Title
This measure shall be known and may be cited as the “California Marriage Protection Act.”
SECTION 2. Section 7.5 is added to Article I of the California Constitution, to read:
SEC. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Since you won't believe me, here is the link:

http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/text-proposed-laws/text-of-proposed-laws.pdf#prop8

By the way, the constitution was created by the people, as were the laws. Either one may be changed by those who created them.

Happy reading!

Randy
December 4, 2008 10:09 PM


Interesting read from the Baptist Press.

http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPnews.asp?ID=29451

Dennis
December 9, 2008 12:02 AM
http://logicalsanity

Randy,

That is some interesting reading. It seems Walker walked away from the LDS church between the ages of 16 and 18 according to this article and never came to a full knowledge of the true gospel as presented by the church. A youth in high school seldom has the wherewithal to make any type of informed decision (that is why they cannot vote in elections). Therefore he is hardly and objective bystander of the church. Can an evil fruit bring forth good fruit? Not according to the Bible, yet look at all the good fruit that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has wrought. The Bible clearly states that by their fruits ye shall know them.

Read All Comments

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

About Crunchy Con

Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Crunchy Con

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.