Jump to content

Positive News Coverage On A Difficult Subject


RobertAC

Recommended Posts

We all know that GLBT/same sex topics can be divisive here, but I am hoping that the topic can stay on mainstream news media coverage of important changes in tone on the subject. Today's article from Mother Jones (a left of center publication) commented:

"The LGBT community had reached out to the church several times before Prop. 8 and we've never been able to connect," says Jim Dabakis, head of the Utah Democratic Party and cofounder of the Utah Pride Center in Salt Lake, who has been involved in these conversations. But after the Prop. 8 backlash, the Utah LGBT community, along with national leaders, commenced a series of meetings with church hierarchy. The first meetings were "a bit uncomfortable," Dabakis recalls. But then, "as we began to meet, and we began to introduce our families, it became much less an issue about legal points, what is the definition of a family, what kind of overarching legal principals are involved, and much more about Christian values and how people should be treated. Minds changed on both sides."

"Not everything has changed, of course. The church still filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of Prop. 8, although it doesn't read like the same sort of full-throated anti-gay sentiment that drove the initiative. The church lawyers who drafted the document seem to have bent over backward to express how much they like gays, and to frame the issue in terms of states' rights, as opposed to morality."

The full article can be found here: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/04/prop-8-mormons-gay-marriage-shift

Overall this appears to be a positive article that recognizes recent developments between the GLBT community and LDS leadership.

Link to comment

"Not everything has changed, of course. The church still filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of Prop. 8, although it doesn't read like the same sort of full-throated anti-gay sentiment that drove the initiative. The church lawyers who drafted the document seem to have bent over backward to express how much they like gays, and to frame the issue in terms of states' rights, as opposed to morality."

The full article can be found here: http://www.motherjon...-marriage-shift

Overall this appears to be a positive article that recognizes recent developments between the GLBT community and LDS leadership.

I call tripe. How was the LDS Church's support of Prop 8 "full throated anti-gay" while their position today not?

Link to comment

I don't think anyone can realistically say that the GLBT community as a whole was not anti-Mormon. It was, and it has been for some time. During the protest after passage of Prop 8, there was a lot of mention of polygamy (e.g. "Joseph Smith had 77 wives. I just want one!"), Mormon beliefs and practices (e.g. magical Mormon underwear), etc.

However, since the 1950s, the LDS leadership has, on the whole, been very quick to condemn GLBT people. There is a lot of bad feelings from the past that seem to be working out in the present.

Link to comment

I don't think anyone can realistically say that the GLBT community as a whole was not anti-Mormon. It was, and it has been for some time. During the protest after passage of Prop 8, there was a lot of mention of polygamy (e.g. "Joseph Smith had 77 wives. I just want one!"), Mormon beliefs and practices (e.g. magical Mormon underwear), etc.

However, since the 1950s, the LDS leadership has, on the whole, been very quick to condemn GLBT people. There is a lot of bad feelings from the past that seem to be working out in the present.

The LDS leaders are quick to condemn lesbian and gay people today. Their behavior is sinful, period. It's the message now and was the message then. Thei amicus als osays the marriage between one man and one woman is what is best for society and that is the position that people should be free to make based upon their right to vote.

Link to comment

I don't think anyone can realistically say that the GLBT community as a whole was not anti-Mormon. It was, and it has been for some time. During the protest after passage of Prop 8, there was a lot of mention of polygamy (e.g. "Joseph Smith had 77 wives. I just want one!"), Mormon beliefs and practices (e.g. magical Mormon underwear), etc.

However, since the 1950s, the LDS leadership has, on the whole, been very quick to condemn GLBT people. There is a lot of bad feelings from the past that seem to be working out in the present.

Quick to condemn? I dont think Ive ever seen the Church condemn anyone, let alone a whole group of people. The invitation from the Church is always an invitation to come to Christ and repent of our sins, no matter who you are.

Link to comment

Quick to condemn? I dont think Ive ever seen the Church condemn anyone, let alone a whole group of people. The invitation from the Church is always an invitation to come to Christ and repent of our sins, no matter who you are.

I have posted similar links before. I am surprised that so few are aware of this history. This history is filled with actions that go beyond simply loving the sinner and hating the sin. Here is a link (one of many out there) provided by Affirmation (a gay Mormon group): http://affirmation.org/anti-gay_actions/

That said, history is history. I think the more interesting observations concern the present and the future. Whether careful PR, or substantive doctrinal changes, it does appear that there is a healthy dialogue currently underway between LDS and GLBT leaders. Personally, I doubt that there will be too many doctrinal changes emerging from this dialogue, but there may be some learning as to how to better deal with GLBT issues when they arise.

Link to comment

I don't think anyone can realistically say that the GLBT community as a whole was not anti-Mormon. It was, and it has been for some time. During the protest after passage of Prop 8, there was a lot of mention of polygamy (e.g. "Joseph Smith had 77 wives. I just want one!"), Mormon beliefs and practices (e.g. magical Mormon underwear), etc.

However, since the 1950s, the LDS leadership has, on the whole, been very quick to condemn GLBT people. There is a lot of bad feelings from the past that seem to be working out in the present.

Well, you don't think that LGBT people have not been negative toward the church? Really?

Link to comment

Well, you don't think that LGBT people have not been negative toward the church? Really?

Throwing in a double negative in a question or statement make it rather confusing. Are you asking Robert if he thinks the LGBT crowd has or hasn't been negative towards the Church?

Link to comment

I call tripe. How was the LDS Church's support of Prop 8 "full throated anti-gay" while their position today not?

Sometimes I am just amazed at how clueless some members of the church still are about the effects of the churches involvement in Prop 8. The church targeting the gay community to take away their right to legally marry is way different than a message of love and to come unto Christ and follow our beliefs.

Link to comment

I have posted similar links before. I am surprised that so few are aware of this history. This history is filled with actions that go beyond simply loving the sinner and hating the sin. Here is a link (one of many out there) provided by Affirmation (a gay Mormon group): http://affirmation.o...ti-gay_actions/

The links within your link do not work for me. So I simply picked one title of interest within your link, "Prominent Mormon Has Ties to Uganda's "Kill the Gays" Pastor" and did a Bing search on it. I got the following: http://www.bing.com/...sc=0-0&sp=-1=

Since the first link seemed to bo what your link wanted to connect to, I clicked on it and read the following (bold mine):

Family Watch International is one example of the many ways in which the LDS Church and individual Mormons have in recent decades created international alliances with other religious groups to lobby against women’s rights and LGBT equality.

Interesting thing about that is that Hugo Salinas of Gay Salt Lake (dot) com provided zero evidence or examples of how the LDS Church is connected to the Uganda bill to imprison gays. In fact the only countries in the world I'm aware of which does any such thing are those with a very high Muslim population, not LDS.

Mormon/Uganda Anti-gay link

Link to comment

Sometimes I am just amazed at how clueless some members of the church still are about the effects of the churches involvement in Prop 8. The church targeting the gay community to take away their right to legally marry is way different than a message of love and to come unto Christ and follow our beliefs.

Sometimes I am amazed on how gravely my posts are misread. The "right" for gays to marry existed for a full five months before Prop 8 came into play. This is agaist thousands of years of marriage between man and woman. The LDS Church's position is no different then than it is now. Their support for Prop 8 was *NOT* any more 'full throated anti-gay' then than it is now. If I err, please show me the light.

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/supreme_court_preview/briefs-v2/12-144_pet_amcu_nae-etal.authcheckdam.pdf

Link to comment

Sometimes I am amazed on how gravely my posts are misread. The "right" for gays to marry existed for a full five months before Prop 8 came into play. This is agaist thousands of years of marriage between man and woman. The LDS Church's position is no different then than it is now. Their support for Prop 8 was *NOT* any more 'full throated anti-gay' then than it is now. If I err, please show me the light.

http://www.americanb...uthcheckdam.pdf

If you can't see the difference between getting politically involved in taking away the right for gays to marry and inviting gays to come unto Christ and follow his teachings as the Mormons teach it, then I doubt I can show you any light. I will give you a hint, one is inviting gays to participate and live within the church standards and the other is attacking what the majority of Americans see as a civli rights issue.

Link to comment

Throwing in a double negative in a question or statement make it rather confusing. Are you asking Robert if he thinks the LGBT crowd has or hasn't been negative towards the Church?

You know, I really have had my fill of this subject!!! Consider me OUTA HERE!!!
Link to comment

If you can't see the difference between getting politically involved in taking away the right for gays to marry and inviting gays to come unto Christ and follow his teachings as the Mormons teach it, then I doubt I can show you any light. I will give you a hint, one is inviting gays to participate and live within the church standards and the other is attacking what the majority of Americans see as a civli rights issue.

No rights were taken away from gays, sir. There was no law in California to recognize gay marriage when Prop 8 was put forth. It was arbitrarily given by the California Supreme Court which overulled a law banning gay marriage. Courts cannot create law, only interpret them.

The Constitution of the state of California was created in 1849 (Rewritten in 1879) to prepare itself for statehood.

Constitution of the State of California 1849*

Proposition 8 was passed in November of 2008. That means from 1849 to 2008 (159 years) no legal recognition was ever given to gay marriage yet three judges suddenly for that right in their state constitution? That was not legislation but judicial activism in its purest form. Prop 8 merely preserved the tradition definition of marriage and it also helped secure freedom of religion for churches nationwide.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints inviteds gays to come unto Christ in 2008 and still does in 2013. There is no moving away from a 'full-throated antigay' position. The LDS Church defended traditional marriage now and it defends it still. No change in invites togays, no change in defending traditional marriage. Saying this is wrong is tripe.

I found this via Daniel Peterson's Patheos blog. It's an excelent read which advocates the LDS to stand and argue in favor of traditional marriage. Failkure to do so will be highly detrimental to society.

http://symphonyofdis...at-byu-4-10-13/

Link to comment

Sometimes I am just amazed at how clueless some members of the church still are about the effects of the churches involvement in Prop 8. The church targeting the gay community to take away their right to legally marry is way different than a message of love and to come unto Christ and follow our beliefs.

You haven't lost your right to marry. You can still marry anyone you choose that falls into the definition of a marriage. What you don't have the right to do is completely redefine marriage.

I have the right to own a puppy if i choose to take on that responsibility. But that doesn't mean I have the right to redefine a puppy as the guy down the street and own him.

Link to comment

If you can't see the difference between getting politically involved in taking away the right for gays to marry and inviting gays to come unto Christ and follow his teachings as the Mormons teach it, then I doubt I can show you any light. I will give you a hint, one is inviting gays to participate and live within the church standards and the other is attacking what the majority of Americans see as a civli rights issue.

No attack has occured unless you are talking about the one attacking the religious liberty of americans who have the audacity to want to have a say in what law their government passes.

You can't attack others and pretend they are attacking you when they defend themselves.

Link to comment

Some of the posts underscore the issue. There has been negative feelings about Mormons by GLBT people arising out of a number of events and statements that predate Prop 8. But there have been antagonistic statements and actions by certain LDS people that were against gays and lesbians, and not just gay Mormons, but people who have no belief in God in the first place. The fact that a lefty publication like Mother Jones is noticing the dialogue and change in tone seems telling to me.

Link to comment

No rights were taken away from gays, sir. There was no law in California to recognize gay marriage when Prop 8 was put forth. It was arbitrarily given by the California Supreme Court which overulled a law banning gay marriage. Courts cannot create law, only interpret them.

The Constitution of the state of California was created in 1849 (Rewritten in 1879) to prepare itself for statehood.

Constitution of the State of California 1849*

Proposition 8 was passed in November of 2008. That means from 1849 to 2008 (159 years) no legal recognition was ever given to gay marriage yet three judges suddenly for that right in their state constitution? That was not legislation but judicial activism in its purest form. Prop 8 merely preserved the tradition definition of marriage and it also helped secure freedom of religion for churches nationwide.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints inviteds gays to come unto Christ in 2008 and still does in 2013. There is no moving away from a 'full-throated antigay' position. The LDS Church defended traditional marriage now and it defends it still. No change in invites togays, no change in defending traditional marriage. Saying this is wrong is tripe.

I found this via Daniel Peterson's Patheos blog. It's an excelent read which advocates the LDS to stand and argue in favor of traditional marriage. Failkure to do so will be highly detrimental to society.

http://symphonyofdis...at-byu-4-10-13/

And so it begins again.

Link to comment

I call tripe. How was the LDS Church's support of Prop 8 "full throated anti-gay" while their position today not?

The article says the church no longer engages in this political fight to "defend traditional marriage" by ensuring that same-sex couples cannot get married. It says, "The LGBT community's best evidence of change within the church is that last year, in the only four states ever to pass marriage equality laws, the church "did not provide one dime or one volunteer," Dabakis says. He adds that in Maryland, when one local Mormon leader tried to organize to oppose a pro-marriage-equality initiative, the church shut her down."

The article concludes by saying, Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules in the Prop. 8 case, the church responsible for its passage has been permanently changed for the better.

If you believe that actions count more than words, then the church has changed, and is in fact getting good publicity for doing so.

Link to comment

The article says the church no longer engages in this political fight to "defend traditional marriage" by ensuring that same-sex couples cannot get married. It says, "The LGBT community's best evidence of change within the church is that last year, in the only four states ever to pass marriage equality laws, the church "did not provide one dime or one volunteer," Dabakis says. He adds that in Maryland, when one local Mormon leader tried to organize to oppose a pro-marriage-equality initiative, the church shut her down."

The article concludes by saying, Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules in the Prop. 8 case, the church responsible for its passage has been permanently changed for the better.

If you believe that actions count more than words, then the church has changed, and is in fact getting good publicity for doing so.

I noticed that Mother Jones put its own slant on the story. However, it did seem like the quoted sources recognized a two-way street between the two groups. One commentator noted: "I don't think the church has given one iota on gay marriage—maybe they never will—and neither have we. On the other hand, we have found a lot of commonalities that we can work on," he says, pointing towards the joint efforts to help homeless kids."

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...