CA Gay Marriage and the LDS (Open Vanity)

17 May 2008 | Gamecock

[Gamecock]

Please feel free to ping your respective lists and chime in as you see fit.

[restornu]

The LDS Church released the following statement:

“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes that same sex marriage can be an emotional and divisive issue. However, the church teaches that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is the basic unit of society. Today’s California Supreme Court decision is unfortunate.”

The church declined comment on what future action it may take to help challenge the court’s decision. Opponents of the ruling are hoping a planned November ballot measure seeking to amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage will succeed.

The LDS Church was active in urging California residents to ban gay marriage through a public referendum in March 2000. Proposition 22 was designed to prevent formal sanction of same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions from gaining future legal recognition on par with traditional marriage. Voters approved the measure, with 61 percent in favor and 39 percent opposed.

Thursday’s 4-3 Supreme Court decision said voters got it wrong.

Broad support for the California ballot measure came from a variety of conservative religious groups, including Catholics, Evangelicals and the LDS Church, which asked its members there to help pass the initiative by volunteering their time and money.

[Gamecock]

Thanks resty.

Now would you answer my question? ;-)

[restornu]

Have a fun on your open thead...

BYE!

[Elsie]

“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes that same sex marriage can be an emotional and divisive issue. However, the church teaches that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is the basic unit of society. Today’s California Supreme Court decision is unfortunate.”

However...

However, the church USED TO teach that marriage between a man and MANY womEn is ordained of God and that the POLYGAMOUS family was NECESSARY for GODHOOD.

When the FEDERAL GOVERNMEWNT threatened them, they rolled over to get their collective belly scratched.

[Elsie]

Now would you answer my question? ;-)

You are an eternal optimist!

[wita]

Blah blah blah, you are right about one thing, this is certainly a vanity. As they say in the lousy restaurant business, enjoy.

[Elsie]

THE
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS

 

SECTION 132

 

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, as also plurality of wives. HC 5: 501–507. Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.

 

1–6, Exaltation is gained through the new and everlasting covenant; 7–14, The terms and conditions of that covenant are set forth; 15–20, Celestial marriage and a continuation of the family unit enable men to become gods; 21–25, The strait and narrow way that leads to eternal lives; 26–27, Law given relative to blasphemy against the Holy Ghost; 28–39, Promises of eternal increase and exaltation made to prophets and saints in all ages; 40–47, Joseph Smith is given the power to bind and seal on earth and in heaven; 48–50, The Lord seals upon him his exaltation; 51–57, Emma Smith is counseled to be faithful and true; 58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.

 

.

.

.

 

  19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man ^amarry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and ^beverlasting covenant, and it is ^csealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of ^dpromise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the ^ekeys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit ^fthrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s ^gBook of Life, that he shall commit no ^hmurder whereby to shed innocent ⁱblood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their ^jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the ^kseeds forever and ever.

  20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from ^aeverlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be ^bgods, because they have ^call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

[Elsie]

So far; 2 Mormons; 0 answers...

[Elsie]

1. If the presiding prophet declared polygamy once again approved of by God, what would your reaction be?
2. Would you men start cruising polygamy bars/matchmaking sites?
3. Women: would you encourage your hubbies to bring home more wives?
4. What would you do if he decided to bring home a covey of wives against your wishes?
5. Would you have any recourse or would you just resign yourself to that being the ticket to your eternal reward?

[greyfoxx39]

LOL...the new rules are not too attractive to some, it appears.

[colorcountry]

Would you men start cruising polygamy bars/matchmaking sites?

Don't forget eHaremny, where you can match with 29 women in a different dimension.

[Gamecock]

So far; 2 Mormons; 0 answers...

Must be a lot closer to the truth than I thought.

Hey Marlowe, you know a quite a bit about the LDS. What's your take on my hypothesis?

[P-Marlowe]

THAT being said, is it outlandish to think that the restorationist LDS sectlets, such as the fLDS, will start bringing cases to court claiming their right to legally marry more than one women at a time? Will the courts in "progressive" states side with these sectlets?

If the right to marry based upon sexual orientation is a Civil Right subject to strict scrutiny then it is inevitable that Marriage cannot be limited to one man and one... whatever. If one claims a sexual preference for polygamous relationships, then on what basis can the government now prohibit polygamy?

The California Supreme court has now opened the door not only for polygamy, but for incest. There is also no remaining legitimate governmental interest in prohibiting prostitution, since all one needs to say is that their sexual preference is to pay for sex, or be paid for it, rather than waste time seeking out true love,

We have truly entered Sodom.

In regard to the Mormon issue, I think it is safe to say that this ruling clearly opens the door for the FLDS to move all of its compounds into California. The only saving grace at this point is that the people of the State of California have apparently qualified a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT prohibiting same sex marriage. I can only pray that it passes by the requisite 60%.

[greyfoxx39]

So far; 2 Mormons; 0 answers...

The mormons have prayer, devotional, caucus and ecumenic threads to propagandize on..why would they come to open threads anymore?

Several "ecumenic" threads have gone up this morning. with one poster lamenting the "anti" forces on the forum. Doesn't sound too "ecumenical" to me.

I, for one, plan to stay away from them and let them propagandize. The threads die sooner while they talk to themselves.

[P-Marlowe]

And finally, if the sectlets are upheld, say in the next 30 or so years, (about the time it took gays to get this far) will the larger LDS body all of a sudden proclaim a new revelation that Polygamy is now condoned by God?

Polygamy for the Utah LDS Church has become the ugly stepsister that they want to keep in the basement. There have been thousands of changes to Mormon doctrines and practices over the last 170 years. Mormonism is attempting to portray itself as just another Christian denomination and to reintroduce polygamy now would be to confirm all the suspicions of the general public that Mormonism is a non-Christian cult.

BTW the Mormon Church never published a "revelation" regarding prohibiting polygmay. Instead they simply issued a statement that the church was no longer engaging in the practice or solemnizing plural marriages. The whole principle of plural marriage is still part of their scriptures as part of the demonic revelation from Joseph Smith located in Doctrine and Covenants section 132. Since that section forms the basis for their blasphemous doctrine that they may, if they practice this in eternity, become Gods of their own planets, it is unlikely that that particular section is going to be stricken from their scriptures.

So personally I don't see the LDS Church latching onto this ruling to once again allow plural marriage in their midst. Even if polygamy is legalized by this decision and others, the LDS Church will continue to excommunicate any member who publicly practices it.

[PAR35]

Given the trend of apologizing for something in which you never participated, certainly the ‘progressive’ states should apologize to the Mormons for forcing them to abandon plural marriages.

[Colofornian]

Women: would you encourage your hubbies to bring home more wives? What would you do if he decided to bring home a covey of wives against your wishes? would you have any recourse or would you just resign yourself to that being the ticket to your eternal reward?

Would the LDS misinterpretation of Isaiah 4:1 kick in? Would 7 women of faith start grabbing the same man? (When you read Isaiah 3 to 4:1 in context, you realize these are hardly "women of faith")