Wall Street Journal (Opinion Section) Slams "8: The Mormon Proposition"

[selek]

again. Sounds like the very same arguments used against my parent's interracial marriage.

And thus the name-calling and emoting continue.

No discussion of where my point was wrong.

No facts offered to counter my position.

Just the sneering implication that those who don't accept the homosexual agenda are the moral and intellectual equivalent of Bull Connors.

In point of fact, a same-sex union is radically different than a heterosexual union- if based only upon the component parts.

The same cannot be said for a "multi-racial" marriage as compared to a "same-race" marriage.

Setting aside the functional equivalency, there is ample historical precedent for multi-racial marriages (especially if one sets aside an ethno-centric fixation on American society). That cannot be said of "homosexual" unions.

Bottom line, Narrator is engaged in both race-baiting and false equivalencies while trying to poison the well against reasoned and factual debate of the actual issue.

It's posts like his that demonstrate the futility of trying to reason with the radical homosexuals or their fellow travellers, and clearly demonstrates why the Moderators need to take a hard stand against the kind of propagandizing engaged in by Narrator and his fellow vis-a-vis homosexual marriage and Prop 8.

Not a single critic in this thread has acknowledged the basic fact that Prop 8 passed because the people of California agreed with it's premises, values and intent.

Their ONLY tactic has been name-calling, fear mongering, and un-abashed bigotry against a small minority that had the temerity to exercise their Constitutional rights.

They haven't demonstrated why our position or our reasoning is wrong- they simply name-call, threaten, and terrorize because we refused to be forced to sit at the back of the bus.

[the narrator]

The point is not who gets credit.

The point is, why do the supporters of SSM make movies/videos/"documentaries", or write columns and blogs criticizing the black or evangelical communities for supporting prop 8?

Because there is no monolithic "Black Church" or "Evangelical Community" that acted as one single group. There is an LDS Church that was led by a single group of leadership in support of Prop 8.

Also, the contributions of black churches, evangelicals, and catholics did not come close to that of Mormons.

[the narrator]

CFR.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/us/politics/15marriage.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&hp

[the narrator]

And thus the name-calling and emoting continue.

Huh? Did I miss something?

You didn't provide any argument. You just gave hollow rhetoric without any basis in reality. CFR for all your claims.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

again. Sounds like the very same arguments used against my parent's interracial marriage.

I would like for you to demonstrate this.

[frankenstein]

CFR.

Mormons For Proposition 8 Donors

Status of FPPC Complaint and fine proposed against LDS Church

A Stipulation [link to PDF version] in the matter of whether the LDS Church reported non-monetary contributions on time during the 2008 election has been completed and will be submitted for final action on June 10th. The Stipulation fines the Church $5,539.00. This is equal to 15% of the amount of money deemed to have been reported late. The 13 separate counts at issue totaled $36,928.00. The stipulation notes the dates and amounts of the late-reported donations.

Where did the money donated to Protect Marriage come from?

California - 75% of the monetary contributions ($27,470,846)

Utah - 7% of the monetary contributions ($2,549,273)

Texas - 3% of the monetary contributions ($1,120,775)

Connecticut - 3% of the monetary contributions ($1,167,450) This includes a $1 million donation from the Catholic Fraternal Organization, the Knights of Columbus.

Everywhere else - 12% of the monetary contributions ($4,220,404)

Total monetary contributions to Protect Marriage come to $40,042,107.98. This does not include about $200,000 in loans and $600,000 in non-monetary donations (including $190,000 from the LDS Church). The Protect Marriage coalition was not the only money-gathering committee in favor of Prop 8, but it was by far the largest. All the other committees combined gathered less than $4 million. According to our research, at least half of the monetary contributions were from individual Mormons.

[the narrator]

I would like for you to demonstrate this.

in several states through much of the 20th century, interracial marriages were prohibited by law (not just black-white) with the basis that they were not prohibiting others from marrying (they could still marry within their race) and that interracial marriage was unnatural and prohibited by God.

My father was pulled aside by some of his family when he announced that he was marrying my Japanese mother, while it was legal in Utah, some of his family told him that it was unnatural, wrong, against the will of God, and that he needed to think about "what your kids would look like." (His 3 sons turned our pretty damned handsome BTW).

[frankenstein]

The point is not who gets credit.

The point is, why do the supporters of SSM make movies/videos/"documentaries", or write columns and blogs criticizing the black or evangelical communities for supporting prop 8?

did "black" leaders issue directives to there members? did black leaders hold teleconferences instructing people on what to do? the squeaky wheel gets the attention. The LDS were the squeaky wheel.

[mfbukowski]

again. Sounds like the very same arguments used against my parent's interracial marriage.

Uh huh.

That's who so many Blacks were in favor of Prop 8. Exactly the same thing, very clearly. They just couldn't see it I guess.

[the narrator]

Uh huh.

That's who so many Blacks were in favor of Prop 8. Exactly the same thing, very clearly. They just couldn't see it I guess.

As humans we all tend to have very short memories when we are the oppressors instead of the oppressed.

It seems that Mormons forgot about another group of people who were prohibited from marrying who they wanted to because their marriages seen as unnatural, non-traditional, a threat to society, against God's will, abominable, purely sexual, a threat to children, and an example of an immoral society.

I'm sure your memory isn't too short. Care to guess who it was that was prohibited from marrying who and how they wanted to?

[ERMD]

did "black" leaders issue directives to there members? did black leaders hold teleconferences instructing people on what to do? the squeaky wheel gets the attention. The LDS were the squeaky wheel.

You're saying that every other person of faith acted completely on their own with no advice or encouragement from their priests or pastors?

Why do you put "black" in "quotes"? The New York Times article cited above uses the term "black" when referring to some of the supporters of prop 8. Is there a problem with it?

[Facsimile 3]

Does anyone else find it funny and ironic that self proclaimed social outsiders (in an existentialist sense) and hipster indie kids were so against Prop 8 and sided with major corporations to put it down? Their opposition (the Prop 8ers) being grass roots organizations based on local levels.

I think it is funny and sad. Talk about siding with THE MAN.

The underdog was totally the Prop 8ers and the fact that an indie film was attempting to shoot them down seems like the biggest sale out statement of the year. I'm sure The Mormon Proposition will be shown on MTV after a Miley Cyrus music video.

[the narrator]

Their opposition being grass roots organizations based on local levels.[

Since when is a major corporate Church considered a grass roots organization?

[the narrator]

Does anyone else find it funny and ironic that self proclaimed social outsiders (in an existentialist sense) and hipster indie kids were so against Prop 8 and sided with major corporations to put it down?

Sounds a lot like the civil rights movement.

Also, with Prop 8 if anything, it was some major corporations who sided with their consumers, not the other way around.

[Facsimile 3]

Since when is a major corporate Church considered a grass roots organization?

Hmm. Well Nar, having served a mission in California when this whole thing hit the fan, I can say that the MEMBERS of the Church and all of their efforts united with the various sects in my areas constituted a grass roots organization. The hours they spent on the phone and walking streets with people of other faiths was very much a LOCAL thing.

Our LDS chapels became centers for the community and so did other local places of worship. It was very much about the little guy wanting to have his view represented despite the strong corporate current going the other way.

[mfbukowski]

As humans we all tend to have very short memories when we are the oppressors instead of the oppressed.

It seems that Mormons forgot about another group of people who were prohibited from marrying who they wanted to because their marriages seen as unnatural, non-traditional, a threat to society, against God's will, abominable, purely sexual, a threat to children, and an example of an immoral society.

I'm sure your memory isn't too short. Care to guess who it was that was prohibited from marrying who and how they wanted to?

So you're calling the Blacks "opressors"?

[selek]

As humans we all tend to have very short memories when we are the oppressors instead of the oppressed.

It seems that Mormons forgot about another group of people who were prohibited from marrying who they wanted to because their marriages seen as unnatural, non-traditional, a threat to society, against God's will, abominable, purely sexual, a threat to children, and an example of an immoral society.

I'm sure your memory isn't too short. Care to guess who it was that was prohibited from marrying who and how they wanted to?

Ironic, isn't it?

Narrator still hasn't demonstrated where and why the people of California were wrong.

He still hasn't demonstrated where Prop 8 was oppressive or even wrong.

He's just throwing more rocks and calling more names.

Either by implication or directly, Narrator has called Mormons (and blacks) bigots, hyprocrits, oppressors, unthinking dupes, and corporate tools- but he still hasn't demonstrated where or why support for Prop 8 was legally, morally, or ethically wrong.

He still hasn't addressed the fact that it was the people of California- NOT the Church- that passed Prop 8.

Narrator is not presenting arguments for his position, he's simply maligning those who disagree with him- without offering any evidence as to why they deserve to by villified.

Narrator still hasn't addressed the fact that the anti-8'ers outspent the Pro-8 side by a considerable margin and still failed to persuade the people of California.

He's not addressing the failings of the anti-8'ers. He's simply heaping scorn and derision on people who don't think like he does.

As such, his posts are a living, breathing example of the proposition that "A good scapegoat is more welcome than an actual solution to the problem."

[Facsimile 3]

Sounds a lot like the civil rights movement.

Also, with Prop 8 if anything, it was some major corporations who sided with their consumers, not the other way around.

Oh yeah, because in the civil rights movement it was all about the people defending white supremacy being fire-hosed down and having attack dogs sent after them by the wave of conformity .

Oh wait I think you might have it backwards. Oh well, history can be like that you know. Malleable for anyone's purposes.

"I want to vote the way Levi Strauss wants me to vote; I'm an authentic person!"

[the narrator]

Hmm. Well Nar, having served a mission in California when this whole thing hit the fan, I can say that the MEMBERS of the Church and all of their efforts united with the various sects in my areas constituted a grass roots organization. The hours they spent on the phone and walking streets with people of other faiths was very much a LOCAL thing.

Well as an active Mormon living in Californian when this whole thing hit the fan, I can sat that the MEMBERS of the Church and all of their efforts were largely being dictated by leaders of the corporate Church in Salt Lake. The hours they spent on the phone and walking streets with people of other faiths were very much actions specifically directed to them from GENERAL AUTHORITIES, including members of the Church's 2nd highest leading body, the Quorum of the 12. This wasn't working bottom up. It was directed top down. This was especially clear in the October statewide broadcast from Salt Lake, in which leaders of the corporate Church told members in detail what they needed to be doing, including telling young single adults what to say to those who opposed Prop 8 and even how many hours a week they should be volunteering for the Prop 8 movement.

When leaders of the corporate Church are telling their members how many hours they should be volunteering if they want to be on the Lord's side, you can't be calling it a grass-roots movement.

Our LDS chapels became centers for the community and so did other local places of worship. It was very much about the little guy wanting to have his view represented despite the strong corporate current going the other way.

Little guy? Is this why one of the LDS Church's arguments was that a majority of Americans opposed gay marriage? Since when was the majority suddenly the "little guy?

[the narrator]

So you're calling the Blacks "opressors"?

Just a euphemism for one group which wants to restrict the rights of another.

[Jeff K.]

Why are you Mormons so reluctant to take credit for the victory?

But for the substantial money and manpower the Mormons contributed to Prop 8, it may very well have been defeated.

To say otherwise, is an insult to those who donated significant time and money to the cause.

I have a nice deep crease in my trucks paint that reflects what Mormons face for their opposition to changing the defintion of marriage.

Jaybear, sigh, subsantial money from Mormons? And yet, its significantly less than those who opposed Prop 8. Even with the pro change the definition of marriage group they failed, with their millions of dollars and more.

Too bad your advocacy of changing the definition of marriage and your advocacy of the gay lifestyle in marriage has blinded you to those basic facts.

[the narrator]

Ironic, isn't it?

Narrator still hasn't demonstrated where and why the people of California were wrong.

He still hasn't demonstrated where Prop 8 was oppressive or even wrong.

He's just throwing more rocks and calling more names.

Either by implication or directly, Narrator has called Mormons (and blacks) bigots, hyprocrits, oppressors, unthinking dupes, and corporate tools- but he still hasn't demonstrated where or why support for Prop 8 was legally, morally, or ethically wrong.

He still hasn't addressed the fact that it was the people of California- NOT the Church- that passed Prop 8.

Narrator is not presenting arguments for his position, he's simply maligning those who disagree with him- without offering any evidence as to why they deserve to by villified.

Narrator still hasn't addressed the fact that the anti-8'ers outspent the Pro-8 side by a considerable margin and still failed to persuade the people of California.

He's not addressing the failings of the anti-8'ers. He's simply heaping scorn and derision on people who don't think like he does.

As such, his posts are a living, breathing example of the proposition that "A good scapegoat is more welcome than an actual solution to the problem."

Selek, please avoid your fantastical accusations and allegations. They just aren't true. Stop lying.

I've debated the merits of Prop 8 over and over again elsewhere. I'm just commenting on the aftermath, and claims about the efforts.

I'm done debating with you. Ever.

[the narrator]

Oh yeah, because in the civil rights movement it was all about the people defending white supremacy being fire-hosed down and having attack dogs sent after them by the wave of conformity .

You are overstepping the analogy. You are a smart philosophy student. You don't need to stoop to this.

[the narrator]

I have a nice deep crease in my trucks paint that reflects what Mormons face for their opposition to changing the defintion of marriage.

Jaybear, sigh, subsantial money from Mormons? And yet, its significantly less than those who opposed Prop 8. Even with the pro change the definition of marriage group they failed, with their millions of dollars and more.

Too bad your advocacy of changing the definition of marriage and your advocacy of the gay lifestyle in marriage has blinded you to those basic facts.

Amazing argument!

[selek]

Well as an active Mormon living in Californian when this whole thing hit the fan, I can sat that the MEMBERS of the Church and all of their efforts were largely being dictated by leaders of the corporate Church in Salt Lake. The hours they spent on the phone and walking streets with people of other faiths were very much actions specifically directed to them from GENERAL AUTHORITIES, including members of the Church's 2nd highest leading body, the Quorum of the 12. This wasn't working bottom up. It was directed top down. This was especially clear in the October statewide broadcast from Salt Lake, in which leaders of the corporate Church told members in detail what they needed to be doing, including telling young single adults what to say to those who opposed Prop 8 and even how many hours a week they should be volunteering for the Prop 8 movement.

When leaders of the corporate Church are telling their members how many hours they should be volunteering if they want to be on the Lord's side, you can't be calling it a grass-roots movement.

Uh-huh. And that lying and bigoted "Mormon missionaries are going to ransack your home, take your marriage license and your wedding rings" ad just spontaneously sprang into existence, right?

The anti-8er's were every bit as organized, and coordinated their own message everybit as carefully as did the Pro-8 side.

Your movement was no more "grass roots" than a Madison Avenue ad campaign.

There were only four differences between the methods of the Pro-8 and anti-8 side.

1. - The Pro-8's made arguments. The anti-8's made accusations.
   
2. - The Pro-8 side urged and counseled people to get out and vote. The Anti-8 side tried to disenfranchise voters through lawsuits and intimidation tactics.
   
3. - The Pro-8 side relied on local and Church leaders to organize and galvanize- in many instances, organizing for the first time. The Anti-8 side used the EXISTING political and lobbying machinery of large corporations, labor unions, and long-standing activist organizations.
   
4. - The Pro-8 side was able to convince the people of California that their position was more reasonable and better for the State and her citizens. The Anti-8 side did not.