Article: Mormon Church Abandons Its Crusade Against Gay Marriage

[smac97]

Here: http://m.motherjones...-marriage-shift

Last month, hundreds of boisterous protesters converged in Washington, DC, as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of California's anti-gay marriage initiative, Proposition 8. Faith-based groups were on prominent display: the Methodists supporting marriage equality, the Westboro Baptists suggesting (per usual) that "God hates fags," the Catholics both for and against gay marriage, clergy of all stripes. But one group that wasn't there in any official capacity was the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—a.k.a. the Mormons—which perhaps more than any other religious group was responsible for getting Prop. 8 passed in the first place.

In the five years since the LDS church sent busloads of the faithful to California to canvass neighborhoods, and contributed more than $20 million via its members to support the initiative, it has all but dropped the rope in the public policy tug of war over marriage equality. The change stems from an even more remarkable if somewhat invisible transformation happening within the church, prompted by the ugly fight over Prop. 8 and the ensuing backlash from the flock.

Although the LDS's prophet hasn't described a holy revelation directing a revision in church doctrine on same-sex marriage or gay rights in general, the church has shown a rare capacity for introspection and humane cultural change unusual for a large conservative religious organization.

I suppose this is a complimentary to the Church, but I think the other shoe will drop sooner or later.

"It seems like the [Mormon] hierarchy has pulled the plug and is no longer taking the lead in the fight to stop same-sex marriage," says Fred Karger, the LGBT activist who first exposed the church's major role in the passage of Prop. 8. "The Mormon Church has lost so many members and suffered such a black eye because of all its anti-gay activities that they really had no choice. I am hopeful that the Catholic Church cannot be far behind."

...

Prop. 8 was a Pyrrhic victory for the Mormons, however. Their role, which the church sought to keep under wraps, was exposed by Karger, who tracked the individual donations pouring into the Yes on 8 campaign back to church members. LGBT activists responded by publicizing the church's involvement, running an ad, for example, showing fake Mormon missionaries knocking on the door of a lesbian couple and then rifling through their drawers and tearing up their marriage license.

Yeah, that commercial was a keeper. Mormon missionaries pushing their way into a lesbian couple's home, ransacking their home, leering at the underwear they find in the chest of drawers, and ripping up a marriage license. Nice.

The negative exposure prompted protests, and many Mormons publicly renounced their church membership. One of them was then 28-year-old Matthew Lawrence, the son of official LDS pollster Gary Lawrence, who had led the Prop. 8 fight. "I love my family so much, but it's hard to not take this personally. We had a brief falling-out over Prop. 22, but that got mended. But two anti-gay initiatives in eight years, it's impossible not to feel attacked," Matthew, who is gay, wrote in 2008.

I wonder how many people "publicly renounced."

The LDS church had always struggled for public acceptance, and the negative press wasn't helping. One poll, conducted a year after Prop. 8 passed, showed that the church's favorability rating had fallen from 42 percent to 37 percent. But its image problem was nothing compared to the internal rifts the Mormons were experiencing. "The church probably deserved the black eye we got from Prop. 8," says Mitch Mayne, an openly gay Mormon leader in the San Francisco area. "What the non-Mormon world didn't get to see was how destructive that was inside the faith."

Ah, good ol' Mitch Mayne.

In response to the anger within Mormon ranks over Prop. 8, the president of the Oakland, California, stake (a stake is akin to a Catholic diocese) began organizing gatherings of gay and straight members to try to bridge the differences. In September 2010, the disgruntled church members received a private audience with one of the church's top officials, Marlin Jensen, who serves as the LDS's historian. The church members tearfully told Jensen their stories—of being shunned by their families, and the homophobia generated by the Prop. 8 campaign. "We explained that [the church had] pitted father against son, mother against daughter, exactly the opposite of what we stand for," says Mayne, who attended the meeting.

After listening to them talk, Jensen did something almost unheard of in a church whose strict authoritarian hierarchy is unaccustomed to being challenged from below: He apologized "for the pain that Prop. 8 caused [us]," Mayne recalls, choking up at the memory. It was, he says, a "very meaningful event."

I wonder if Elder Jensen was acting in his capacity as historian or as a Seventy at this meeting.

The apology from a high church official turned out to be just the beginning of a cultural shift toward greater acceptance of gays and lesbians within LDS ranks. In 2011, Mayne was called to serve as an official of his local San Francisco ward, as an openly gay man. It was a historic appointment in an institution with a long history of excommunicating openly gay members, which it referred to as people who were "afflicted" with same-sex attraction.

Since then, the church has opened its doors to LGBT members in many places, Mayne says: "Everybody is welcome here. Nobody is under that threat of being excommunicated." In 2012, the church even created a website, Mormonsandgays.org, to convey its desire for more-humane treatment of LGBT members. Also last year, about 300 straight Mormons marched in the Salt Lake City pride parade, a significant and emotional first. Mayne says the new website, like the church, still has a long way to go, but he and other gay Mormons see it as a step in the right direction.

"A long way to go."

"A step in the right direction."

The other shoe will drop. It's just a question of when.

Perhaps most significantly, the church has made a concerted effort to bring LGBT kids back into the fold. Mayne points out that gay Mormon kids have significantly higher suicide rates than gay non-Mormon ones—a problem that has been attributed to the church's longtime policy of forcing parents of gay kids to choose between their church and their children. It also has long been common practice for Mormon parents to kick LGBT adolescents out of their homes because of their sexual orientation. (When Matt Lawrence, the church pollster's son, broke with his family over Prop. 8, he told stories about his family's efforts to "straighten me out" by sending him to live with homophobic cousins in Utah.) Utah foster parents, too, generally won't take in LGBT children. That's one reason why heavily Mormon Utah has so many homeless LGBT kids on the streets. But even that is starting to change.

The church has worked with the Family Acceptance Project at San Francisco State University to craft an educational booklet aimed specifically at helping Mormons parent their gay kids, to keep them safe at home and to prevent suicide. It's a remarkably humane document instructing church members on how to embrace their gay kids even when they're uncomfortable with their purple hair and transgendered friends. The pamphlet is now being used in lots of Mormon wards. Meanwhile, in Salt Lake City, where the church is headquartered, the church has teamed up with the LGBT community to open a shelter for young homeless people there, about 40 percent of whom are known to be LGBT.

Wow. This is a lot of new information to me.

"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.

Huh. I had wondered about the muted tone and content of the amicus brief.

Mormon church doctrine still defines homosexuality as a sin. The gay Mormon website clarifies that while having a same-sex attraction is not a sin, acting on it is. Mayne was only able to take on his leadership role in the church after he broke up with his longtime partner and was single again. And noncelibate LGBT members are still excluded from "temple recommends"—access to the church's most sacred spaces and ceremonies.

I wonder if doctrinal détente is possible, where the LDS Church can maintain its teachings as described above, and the LGBT movement will allow the LDS Church to maintain those teachings.

Dabakis says that there are still many points of disagreement. "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.

I hope so, but I am skeptical.

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.

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. In Mayne's view, this all means that Prop. 8, with all its ugliness, happened for a reason: "I believe in our attempt to nail shut the Pandora’s box of gay marriage, we essentially blew the lid off of it."

Interesting stuff.

-Smac

Edited May 9, 2013 by smac97

[MormonMason]

The prophecies must be fulfilled concerning the wickedness of the last days--and now they are on their way to becoming so. Are the rest of us prepared for the judgments to come?

[Calm]

He apologized "for the pain that Prop. 8 caused [us],"

I'd like to hear exactly what Elder Jensen said. It is possible to express sorrow about the pain someone has to go through, without accepting responsibility for that sorrow. My question would be 'was Elder Jensen claiming that the Church was responsible for the pain?'

[Calm]

Mayne points out that gay Mormon kids have significantly higher suicide rates than gay non-Mormon ones

I'd like to see the data on that. I've looked for it and all I've found is anecdotes.

It also has long been common practice for Mormon parents to kick LGBT adolescents out of their homes because of their sexual orientation..... Utah foster parents, too, generally won't take in LGBT children.

Again, would like to see research beyond anecdotes for this.

The church has worked with the Family Acceptance Project at San Francisco State University to craft an educational booklet aimed specifically at helping Mormons parent their gay kids, to keep them safe at home and to prevent suicide. It's a remarkably humane document instructing church members on how to embrace their gay kids even when they're uncomfortable with their purple hair and transgendered friends. The pamphlet is now being used in lots of Mormon wards. Meanwhile, in Salt Lake City, where the church is headquartered, the church has teamed up with the LGBT community to open a shelter for young homeless people there, about 40 percent of whom are known to be LGBT.

Glad to hear this...

I had wondered about the muted tone and content of the amicus brief.

Do you agree with their portrayal? Edited May 9, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

This is how Elder Jensen's comment was reported by Carol Lynn Pearson:

The headline "Elder Marlin Jensen Apologizes for Proposition 8" is a bit misleading. I was present at the meeting. There was a great deal of pain expressed by a number of people about their experiences around Prop 8 and the larger context of church policy regarding gay people. It was a remarkable meeting, and Elder Jensen took copious notes and was visibly emotionally touched as he listened to the stories. At no time did he say anything like, "I know Proposition 8 was a mistake and I apologize for that mistake." He was responding personally and in general to the extraordinary pain he was witnessing. No one had a tape recorder, but I wrote down the words, "...Do we owe an apology? I will say I am sorry. To the full extent of my capacity I say I am sorry." It was a sincere and moving statement. It would not be constructive to make his statement sound like something it was not. The meeting itself was an historical event, for which I and many others are deeply grateful.

http://www.huffingto...y_b_739609.html Edited May 9, 2013 by calmoriah

[canard78]

I'd like to hear exactly what Elder Jensen said. It is possible to express sorrow about the pain someone has to go through, without accepting responsibility for that sorrow. My question would be 'was Elder Jensen claiming that the Church was responsible for the pain?'

I was about to ask the same thing:

"He apologized "for the pain that Prop. 8 caused [us],"

That could be "I'm sorry for the pain that Prop 8 caused..."

Two possibles: "I'm sorry - I apologise"

"I'm sorry - I empathise with your sorrow."

If you go to a funeral and say "I'm sorry for your loss..." you're not apologising for it.

I like Elder Jensen, I get the impression he speaks from the heart. This and other things like the 'tacit acknowledgement' of 'leaving in droves' suggest he doesn't worry too much about media training and avoiding soundbites and 'requotables.' Someone who is more 'media trained' might have said something like:

"They're not leaving in droves but we are aware that googling information is raising concerns for some people."

Or

"Prop 8 campaigning must have been very painful experience for you to go through..."

Not a criticism just an observation. I actually prefer 'non-media-speak.' And it makes for better quotes

[canard78]

This is how Elder Jensen's comment was reported by Carol Lynn Pearson:

http://www.huffingto...y_b_739609.html

Thanks, that's much clearer and in line with his expression of sorrow at their pain. Having said that he also puts it in the context of an apology, so it also suggests that he is sorry the events happened at all.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

If we do nothing we are endorsing it. We then become the very ones that help change the truth of God into a lie. God our Father has spoken by word and example, then gave us the "Proclamation on the Family". Support the Doctrines of the Church and Gospel and we will remain Spiritually safe, we do not need the praise of the World, nor fear man.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[omni]

Considering the article came from Mother Jones I feel it was an overall positive and fair portrayal. I believe the church has learned a lot from Prop 8, that you can remain strong in your convictions without forcing them on others. I look forward to continued progress and bridge building in the future.

[Bob Crockett]

was exposed by Karger, who tracked the individual donations pouring into the Yes on 8 campaign back to church members.

Ah yes. Maxine Hanks headed that up. I was a victim. She asked people in her organization to poll sympathetic church members to link the public list of contributors to privately-known information about church membership and, in particular, those who were leaders. Once that information was published by her website, I was the victim of numerous email attacks directed to my law firm. I asked an anonymous person in her organization, who went by the name of "Moroni" to remove my name from their list. He refused, asking me if I was ashamed to be a member of the Church. Those were great days.

[Avatar4321]

Im sorry for the pain sin causes too. That doesn't make it any less sinful.

When were we ever encouraged to kick our children out of our homes? That's not what the Gospel teaches, nor have i ever seen the Church recommend that.

And why would we organize protests? The Amicus brief is in. Why would protest when that will have absolutely no effect on the Court's decision when we already have made our arguments for the Court to here?

I don't get people sometimes.

[Gillebre]

The Church will never apologize for doing the right thing, for standing up and declaring the truth: marriage is a divine relationship ordained between man and woman. The Church has never counseled members to reject anyone who struggles with temptation towards one thing or another, neither has it advocated the idea that youth ought to be disowned, shunned, and otherwise ostracized.

The Church is not responsible for the un-Christlike behavior of some members who were incapable of genuine unconditional love towards those attracted to their own gender.

It is unacceptable that anyone is treated that way, but to say that Elder Jensen's personal feelings about the pain others went through amounts to fault on the Church's part for ever being involved at all is a highly egregious error, where such is either implied or stated.

As one who experiences feelings of same-sex attraction, this issue hits close to home. However, what hits closer to home is that I have a testimony of living Prophets, specifically of Thomas Spencer Monson, his councilors, and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

The will of the Lord regarding same-sex marriage was revealed in 1994 at the General Relief Society Meeting in the latter part of that year, which we know as The Family: A Proclamation to the World. As far as that goes, the line is drawn, and we are free to decide on which side (and with what Master) we stand.

There's an extremely appropriate and inspired question given in the Temple Recommend interview, which I would like to post as sort of food for thought.

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

I've given thought to that question many times, and it really seems like it ought to be more black and white than it may be, in our day. This isn't directed towards anyone in specific, but is rather given in the most general sense. Also, this is not a judgment of anyone who finds themselves supporting gay marriage yet finds some way to answer in the above question in the negative.

I'm sure we're all familiar with the parable (and prophecy) regarding the wheat and the tares, and it is my personal belief that the issues of our day, particularly gay marriage, are things which will sift the Latter-day Saints.

Line upon line is how we grow and progress, right? I submit that the opposite is just as true, that line upon line is how we are led away from the straight and narrow path to eternal life. We will never find ourselves suddenly on the opposite side of the Lord, and by extension, His living Prophet. Rather, we will find ourselves opposite our Savior one step at a time, little by little, until eventually our faith and testimony crumble and we despise the truth we once loved.

Ever wonder how the adversary leads people away, "carefully", even the very elect? Just look at the issues we are facing in our day, how they're framed ("equality" for example), and what they motivate people to do. Really, the adversary just needs to obscure our sight, to get us away from black and white and into the gray. Then you will begin to see, in some form, how the enemy of our soul, and his angels, go about the work of spiritual death among God's children.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Gillebre

[california boy]

Considering the article came from Mother Jones I feel it was an overall positive and fair portrayal. I believe the church has learned a lot from Prop 8, that you can remain strong in your convictions without forcing them on others. I look forward to continued progress and bridge building in the future.

I completely agree with you. The point of the article is that the church has significantly changed its involvement to gay marriage. It would be very difficult for any member to disagree with this statement. I have certainly seen significant movement both on the churches activism against gay marriage and the reaching out to the gay community in a spirit of love and compassion. For years, the church would not even use the word gay. Has the church changed it's doctrinal position? No, of course not. And no one who understands Mormon theology expects that to change unless the prophet is directed to do so.

What I am not clear on is why all the sniping at the article when the general tone and results seem to be right on. Perhaps the author tries to explain the change differently than some would, but the change is certainly accurate. Are people regretting the churches movement to be more understanding and inclusive? That just seems odd to me.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Considering the article came from Mother Jones I feel it was an overall positive and fair portrayal. I believe the church has learned a lot from Prop 8, that you can remain strong in your convictions without forcing them on others. I look forward to continued progress and bridge building in the future.

Making your position known to the world is not forcing anything on another.

[changed]

"This topic of judging others could actually be taught in a two-word sermon. When it comes to hating, gossiping, ignoring, ridiculing, holding grudges, or wanting to cause harm, please apply the following: Stop it!

It’s that simple. We simply have to stop judging others and replace judgmental thoughts and feelings with a heart full of love for God and His children. God is our Father. We are His children. We are all brothers and sisters. I don’t know exactly how to articulate this point of not judging others with sufficient eloquence, passion, and persuasion to make it stick. I can quote scripture, I can try to expound doctrine, and I will even quote a bumper sticker I recently saw. It was attached to the back of a car whose driver appeared to be a little rough around the edges, but the words on the sticker taught an insightful lesson. It read, “Don’t judge me because I sin differently than you."

- President Uchtdorf said last year in general conference

How do we usually treat sinners - the sinners of other varieties? How do we treat women who have chidlren out of wedlock? How do we treat members struggling with addictions? Compassion, love, and support is the best way to treat everyone, the bumper sticker is right.

[ERayR]

Another crusade abandoned and I didn't even get my armor polished or my horses shod. That's what happens when you get old and slow.

[SamIam]

If we do nothing we are endorsing it. We then become the very ones that help change the truth of God into a lie. God our Father has spoken by word and example, then gave us the "Proclamation on the Family". Support the Doctrines of the Church and Gospel and we will remain Spiritually safe, we do not need the praise of the World, nor fear man.

On the thrird time, when Joseph asked God to let Martin "borrow" the Book of Mormon manuscript and God said go ahead, even though he previously had refused, does that mean he was endorsing it? Not in the least. It only means there is an appropriate period of warning and then if they will not heed the warning then let them act according to the desires of their heart. Thereafter, will be judgement. In Joseph's case he felt so severely chastised for failing to heed the will of the Lord that his pain is evident in the records of the event - and he was repentent. What will it be for those that are not?

[thesometimesaint]

We pay to the utter most Farthing for any unrepented of sin. But it is not my job to collect on that debt.

Edited May 9, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The prophecies must be fulfilled concerning the wickedness of the last days--and now they are on their way to becoming so. Are the rest of us prepared for the judgments to come?

It feels like it is just around the corner.

[wenglund]

Got to love the masterful propaganda technique of guilt by association through use of the word "crusade."

We should all be pleased that the Church has finally retired it's thumbscrews, rack, Scold's bridle, execution wheels, and so forth, frequently employed during the Prop 8 election.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited May 9, 2013 by wenglund

[wenglund]

Beware of agenda-driven interpretation creep, where the Church having taken a less proactive approach in seemingly lost political causes, and having counseled members to treat others with kindness, will be leveraged into a mandate against condemnation of sin, and perhaps even the embrace of sin.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited May 9, 2013 by wenglund

[jwhitlock]

The problem with the article is that rather blatant inaccuracies are portrayed as the norm for the church. If that's the kind of perspective gay marriage supporters are coming from, we're never going to see eye to eye on the subject.

Gay marriage supporters need to be accurate in their understanding of us, rather than thinking that faked commercials about Mormon missionaries are somehow a portrayal of what the church is about. Until they want to productively engage in the issue, rather than demonizing those who have concerns about their agendas, I for one am not going to take them seriously.

[Kenngo1969]

Another crusade abandoned and I didn't even get my armor polished or my horses shod. That's what happens when you get old and slow.

Good one, ERayR. Good one!

[Kenngo1969]

I would be the last to suggest that the Church of Jesus Christ (or that Jesus Christ Himself) should at all be concerned over criticism about how He (that is, Christ) or it (that is, His church) expends resources. However, perhaps the Lord has told the Church and its leaders, essentially, "Okay. We've made our stand. That stand is known well enough by now that continuing to expend resources on it to a great degree when we have so many other things to do simply means that return on resources spent on this so-called 'crusade' forever will diminish from this point on: the more resources we expend, the less the per-dollar (e.g.,) return will be. I asked my servants to raise a voice of warning. They did so. From now on, I'll preach my own sermons."

[SamIam]

I would be the last to suggest that the Church of Jesus Christ (or that Jesus Christ Himself) should at all be concerned over criticism about how He (that is, Christ) or it (that is, His church) expends resources. However, perhaps the Lord has told the Church and its leaders, essentially, "Okay. We've made our stand. That stand is known well enough by now that continuing to expend resources on it to a great degree when we have so many other things to do simply means that return on resources spent on this so-called 'crusade' forever will diminish from this point on: the more resources we expend, the less the per-dollar (e.g.,) return will be. I asked my servants to raise a voice of warning. They did so. From now on, I'll preach my own sermons."

Precisely.