How much influence did the LDS Church have on California Prop 8?

[california boy]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

I think you have to distinguish between influence and vote. They are different things and you are conflating them. It's not that hard to Google articles from that time, folks. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/08/local/me-gayblack8  The split was so bad that anti Prop leaders feared alienating the black community.

  

I have never made the claim nor has anyone else on this board that the church members vote was what won the Proposition.  In fact, I have never heard anyone ever make that claim.  What we have consistently stated over and over again is that the church contributed more both financially and manpower to pass Prop 8 than any other organization.  I can't even believe we are discussing this point.  It is indisputable.  No other organization even comes close to what the Mormon church raised and the man-hours put into passing Prop 8.

There is a movie about this proposition.  It is titled Prop 8: The Mormon Proposition.  If you want to understand the role the church DID play, I would recommend you watch this film.  I might add that nowhere in that film does anyone make the claim that the Mormon vote is what tipped the election.  I hope that is clear enough for you.

[carbon dioxide]

8 hours ago, california boy said:

 The fact that the church was involved in this stripping of another's civil rights is what should never be forgotten.  

What rights did the Church strip.  There was no established right for the gays to be married.  You can't strip a right if it was not there to begin with.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

On May 20, 2016 at 1:59 PM, bluebell said:

Do you believe that the apostles are lying when they say that God told them to carry out prop 8, or that they were deceived?

That might sound antagonistic but I'm not trying to be snarky. I'm sincerely wondering your thoughts on that. 

 

 

On May 20, 2016 at 2:02 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I hate to speak for Rockpond, but likely the word you are looking for is mistaken, not lying. Happens to the best of us. 

 

On May 20, 2016 at 2:08 PM, bluebell said:

That's not actually the word i was looking for.

Lying happens to the best of us too.  And being deceived happens to the best of us as well.  We're all human.  However, I think it would be difficult for 15 men to be so specifically mistaken about the same things, which is why I didn't ask about that angle.  

But you are right in that i should have allowed for that option.  Maybe rockpond does believe that they all misunderstood what God actually told them.

 

 

18 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Do you think a stake high council has ever made a wrong decision when they felt led by the spirit? What about a ward council? If they believe a decision was inspired, can they be mistaken or must they be lying?

 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think that it would definitely be a lot easier to make mistakes in terms of inspiration while in a group than when each member of the group is alone trying to get personal inspiration on the subject. 

So you are saying in the prop 8 case each Apostle independently decided action was the right and inspired course without talking to each other about it first?

[jkwilliams]

4 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

What rights did the Church strip.  There was no established right for the gays to be married.  You can't strip a right if it was not there to begin with.

The California Supreme Court had established that the right to same-sex marriage was guaranteed by the California constitution. Proposition 8 was a direct response intended to strip that right from California residents. 

[california boy]

11 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

What rights did the Church strip.  There was no established right for the gays to be married.  You can't strip a right if it was not there to begin with.

Since you seem to be unaware of the Civil Rights guaranteed every American written into the constitution, let me repost what I wrote only a page back.

The American Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law for all citizens.  We call such guarantees Civil Rights.  Prior to prop 8, that civil right was affirmed by the Supreme Court of California.  The right for gays to marry was legal in the state of California.  Then the Mormon church and others thought they could cook up a way to prevent gays from having that legal right.  So along came prop 8 which by vote temporally suspended that civil rights.  The proposition was taken to court and the district judge ruled that under our constitution civil rights can not be taken away by a vote of the people.  We call that protecting the tyranny of the majority on the minority.  That ruling was appealed to the federal courts.  They also affirmed that under equal protection clause of the US constitution, the civil rights of gays had been violated.  Since then virtually EVERY federal and district court has ruled that not allowing gay marriage was a violation of their civil rights.  Even Mormon judges realized the travesty of justice the church supported.  This issue culminated with the Supreme Court of the United States also affirming the civil rights of gay couples.  Rarely is a legal issue so clear that virtually every federal court in the country agrees with those constitutional protections.  

When were those civil rights given to gay couples?  The same time Mormons were given the right to have their civil rights protected.  When the constitution of the United States was established.  Those civil rights existed long before there was even a Mormon church.

[jkwilliams]

20 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

What rights did the Church strip.  There was no established right for the gays to be married.  You can't strip a right if it was not there to begin with.

From the California Supreme Court's ruling in March 2008:

Holding

Sexual orientation is recognized as a suspect class for purposes of the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution. Offering a legal relationship called "marriage" to opposite-sex couples while consigning gay couplesto "domestic partnerships" impinges upon the fundamental right to marry by denying such legal relationships equal dignity and respect. The distinction between marriage and domestic partnerships risks the right to privacy regarding sexual orientation for those in domestic partnerships. Both because a suspect class is targeted and because fundamental rights are impinged upon by the challenged provisions, the strict scrutiny standard of review applies, under which those provisions limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples must serve a compelling state interest and be necessary to serve such an interest. Neither being the case, laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples are unconstitutional.

Edited May 21, 2016 by jkwilliams

[jkwilliams]

So, if we take the word of the California Supreme Court, Prop 8 stripped gay Californians of the fundamental rights of marriage, equal protection under the law, and privacy. 

[JAHS]

A lot has already been said about this so I may repeat something. I live in California and the Church went all out on this having us call people, stand out on the street corners holding up signs, asking for donations, etc. and to me it was a waste of time. I didn't feel it was right telling people how to vote. And how many people really vote for or against something just because they see someone holding a sign about it? I certainly hope there aren't any. 
The only thing good about it I suppose was to let the world know how the Church stands on this issue. 

[Storm Rider]

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

I have never made the claim nor has anyone else on this board that the church members vote was what won the Proposition.  In fact, I have never heard anyone ever make that claim.  What we have consistently stated over and over again is that the church contributed more both financially and manpower to pass Prop 8 than any other organization.  I can't even believe we are discussing this point.  It is indisputable.  No other organization even comes close to what the Mormon church raised and the man-hours put into passing Prop 8.

There is a movie about this proposition.  It is titled Prop 8: The Mormon Proposition.  If you want to understand the role the church DID play, I would recommend you watch this film.  I might add that nowhere in that film does anyone make the claim that the Mormon vote is what tipped the election.  I hope that is clear enough for you.

Ah, that wonder of religious documentaries that is a bastion of truth, facts, and fairness.  I interpret this broadcast to bring a neutral perspective and review of this eye-opening film:

The Wall Street Journal noted that "as a spotlight on the suffering of same-sex couples and individuals who are rejected by family and church leaders, the film succeeds. Its critique of the church's recent political activism, however, is as ham-fisted as many of the mid-19th century allegations against the church." it goes on to say "The film's basic narrative also is compelling. It describes how, with Proposition 8 lagging in the polls, the church's hierarchy in Utah determined that other religious conservatives were not pulling their weight. Thus, the church ordered its members to become a "mighty army," as one top leader put it in a video broadcast obtained by the filmmakers." and "A church infamous for its defense of polygamy in the late 19th century had become the backbone of the 21st century campaign against gay marriage." The reviewer also states that, "The specter of Mormon money raised in the film seems like a latter-day version of older fears about Jewish financiers controlling the American economy and government. The Mormon effort made a difference only because Californians are roughly evenly divided on the issue of same-sex marriage."^[12]

If you follow the links you will see that I copied this from Wikipedia.  There are a much greater number of glowing reviews, but their provenance is viewed as less than neutral.  Obviously, the Church refused to participate or comment on the film.  

The last line of the quote above I highlighted because it is so germane to our conversation. 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Storm Rider said:

 The Mormon effort made a difference only because Californians are roughly evenly divided on the issue of same-sex marriage."^[12]

If you follow the links you will see that I copied this from Wikipedia.  There are a much greater number of glowing reviews, but their provenance is viewed as less than neutral.  Obviously, the Church refused to participate or comment on the film.  

The last line of the quote above I highlighted because it is so germane to our conversation. 

So, you concede that, in a close race, the church's efforts made a pretty significant difference?

I haven't seen the film, but I'm surprised to hear that from you. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

So you are saying in the prop 8 case each Apostle independently decided action was the right and inspired course without talking to each other about it first?

Pres. Nelson has said that that is how the quorum of the apostles and the prophet approach questions concerning how the church should proceed.  They fast and pray individually, as well as together, and they ponder alone and together as well.  All so that when the prophet declares what the will of the Lord is, the apostles will get confirmation.

"Sharing personal experiences he has had working with the First Presidency while serving in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, President Nelson spoke of the process they — the 15 men sustained as prophets, seers and revelators — go through when discussing issues in the Church.

“The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together and share all the Lord has directed us to understand and to feel, individually and collectively,” he said. “And then, we watch the Lord move upon the President of the Church to proclaim the Lord’s will.”

This “prophetic process” — which also includes fasting, prayer, studying, pondering, counseling with each other as they wrestle with the issue — was followed in 2012 with the change in age for missionary service, as well as the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries, President Nelson said.

“Filled with compassion for all, and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord’s will in this matter,” he said. “Ever mindful of God’s plan of salvation and of His hope for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration.

“And then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord, each of us during that sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord to His servants is a sacred process. And so is your privilege of receiving personal revelation.”

This is from Pres. Nelson's talk Becoming True Millennials .

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, cinepro said:

Robert, if you don't agree that the LDS Church had the largest role in passing Prop 8, which other religion or group do you think had a larger role? 

Just based on the population of the Roman Catholic Church (which invited the LDS Church to participate), and the heavy vote by them, I would say that they had the bulk of responsibility.  After all, unlike the LDS, their priests even admonished their congregations from the pulpit to vote for Prop 8.  I don't know the  population of the Black Church in California, but they and the evangelicals certainly constituted more people than the LDS, and they were out demonstrating on street corners.  The idea that the LDS had the largest role is just silly.

And he didn't say "solely on lies and fear".  I don't know about "lies", but there was definitely an undercurrent of fear about what would happen to society and religious rights if gays could legally marry.  For example, if someone says "Legalized gay marriage would allow the government to force Bishops to officiate gay weddings", isn't that an argument based on fear?

I knew of  no current of fear, although one heard then (and even now) an occasional worry that bishops would have to officiate.  Anyone with half a brain knew that would be unconstitutional.

I think the "sage and calm assessment" is that Prop 8 was a failure (it turned out to be a huge investment of time and money for a relatively short delay in homosexual marriage becoming legal.)  Only to the degree that the initiative hastened the resolution in the Supreme Court and helped turn public opinion in favor of SSM in general, as well as fostering ill-will towards the Church, could it be considered a "disaster."

I do not deem the political process in America a failure.  A calm assessment is that you win some and you lose some, and peace prevails.  We solve our problems at the ballot box and in the courts, unlike many other countries.  That is a tremendous success for everyone, and a sobering learning experience for the losers.  This will not be the first time that the LDS Church has suffered some ill will, and that is not a disaster.  Never has been.

 

[carbon dioxide]

2 hours ago, JAHS said:

A lot has already been said about this so I may repeat something. I live in California and the Church went all out on this having us call people, stand out on the street corners holding up signs, asking for donations, etc. and to me it was a waste of time. I didn't feel it was right telling people how to vote. And how many people really vote for or against something just because they see someone holding a sign about it? I certainly hope there aren't any. 
The only thing good about it I suppose was to let the world know how the Church stands on this issue. 

The Church really did not need to do that.  Just a small press release and not recognizing SSM is enough to let the world know we don't support it.  I would agree that holding up signs don't do much.  SSM is an issue that are you either for or against and one is not going to be persuaded to one side or another by looking at a sign or watching an ad. 

[carbon dioxide]

 

3 hours ago, california boy said:

I have never made the claim nor has anyone else on this board that the church members vote was what won the Proposition.  In fact, I have never heard anyone ever make that claim.  What we have consistently stated over and over again is that the church contributed more both financially and manpower to pass Prop 8 than any other organization.

I would agree with that point.  I would assert however that even if the church did nothing, Prop 8 still would have passed.  The Church did not need to get involved in dozens of SSM cases around the country and SSM was banned in all those states.  Even liberal California still was not for SSM for the majority of the people.  I still think it is possible that if it was up for vote, it still would be rejected.  People say on thing to pollsters and do another thing when they are casting a vote in secret.

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

So, you concede that, in a close race, the church's efforts made a pretty significant difference?

I haven't seen the film, but I'm surprised to hear that from you. 

I think you misunderstood the quote you highlighted.  The populace was "roughly evenly divided on the issue of same-sex marriage".  If the populace was not evenly divided there was would have been no impact.  If you are trying to say that one vote is significant difference in a close race, then yes.  

I also have not seen the film nor have I ever heard of it until Cal cited it.  It is not the type of film I would ever go to the theater to watch, but I understand its appeal to a certain segment of the population.  It was written, and if I recall correctly, directed by an ex-Mormon that unsurprisingly is also gay.  He had an agenda and I suspect he accomplished it.  

The last movie I watched was "A Walk in the Woods" with Robert Redford and Nick Nolte.  Two old guys walk part of the Appalachian Trail.  I saw it on Amazon Price for free - it was interesting.  I am a Camino de Santiago de Compostela enthusiast and thought this would have some similar themes.  Cheers,

 

[jkwilliams]

23 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

 

I would agree with that point.  I would assert however that even if the church did nothing, Prop 8 still would have passed.  The Church did not need to get involved in dozens of SSM cases around the country and SSM was banned in all those states.  Even liberal California still was not for SSM for the majority of the people.  I still think it is possible that if it was up for vote, it still would be rejected.  People say on thing to pollsters and do another thing when they are casting a vote in secret.

I don't think anyone can say what would have happened had the church not been involved. But it's a moot point because they were heavily involved. We all know that. 

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I think you misunderstood the quote you highlighted.  The populace was "roughly evenly divided on the issue of same-sex marriage".  If the populace was not evenly divided there was would have been no impact.  If you are trying to say that one vote is significant difference in a close race, then yes.  

I also have not seen the film nor have I ever heard of it until Cal cited it.  It is not the type of film I would ever go to the theater to watch, but I understand its appeal to a certain segment of the population.  It was written, and if I recall correctly, directed by an ex-Mormon that unsurprisingly is also gay.  He had an agenda and I suspect he accomplished it.  

The last movie I watched was "A Walk in the Woods" with Robert Redford and Nick Nolte.  Two old guys walk part of the Appalachian Trail.  I saw it on Amazon Price for free - it was interesting.  I am a Camino de Santiago de Compostela enthusiast and thought this would have some similar themes.  Cheers,

 

I didn't misunderstand. When a vote is close, money and organization may make the difference. Had the electorate been heavily for or against, the church's involvement would have had little impact. 

[Storm Rider]

I was doing some digging about how the pro and anti groups were funded.  Much has been said about the terrible Mormons and their outlandish funding machine.  I googled it and of course Wikipedia had some facts to share:

• The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.0 million ($11.3 million or 29.1% from outside California) and $44.1 million ($13.2 million or 30.0% from outside California), respectively,^[49] from over 64,000 people in all 50 states and more than 20 foreign countries, ....

Looks like a whole lot of people outside California was pouring money into the state for this Proposition.  I wonder why no films were made about how funds were received form the anti-Prop 8 side or the terrible lies, blah, blah, blah that they did?  Hmm, I am seeing a pattern of why a scapegoat is a scapegoat and why certain groups are viewed with completely blind eyes, closed ears, and sealed lips.  That old saying about when you point your finger at someone else - how many fingers are pointing directly back at you - fits pretty well. 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Storm Rider said:

I was doing some digging about how the pro and anti groups were funded.  Much has been said about the terrible Mormons and their outlandish funding machine.  I googled it and of course Wikipedia had some facts to share:

• The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.0 million ($11.3 million or 29.1% from outside California) and $44.1 million ($13.2 million or 30.0% from outside California), respectively,^[49] from over 64,000 people in all 50 states and more than 20 foreign countries, ....

Looks like a whole lot of people outside California was pouring money into the state for this Proposition.  I wonder why no films were made about how funds were received form the anti-Prop 8 side or the terrible lies, blah, blah, blah that they did?  Hmm, I am seeing a pattern of why a scapegoat is a scapegoat and why certain groups are viewed with completely blind eyes, closed ears, and sealed lips.  That old saying about when you point your finger at someone else - how many fingers are pointing directly back at you - fits pretty well. 

I think it's probably because only one side was targeting a protected class to deprive them of established rights. I don't think the Mormons were terrible. I am just puzzled as to why Mormons are trying to minimize what they accomplished. 

[Storm Rider]

44 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I think it's probably because only one side was targeting a protected class to deprive them of established rights. I don't think the Mormons were terrible. I am just puzzled as to why Mormons are trying to minimize what they accomplished. 

It is evident that the LDS Church is the scapegoat.  I don't think anyone can legitimately state otherwise.  There is no doubt, nor is a desire, to deflect the responsibility for the actions of the both the Church and its members.  Those that participated, I suspect, don't have one iota of regret for taking a stand for the human family and from seeking to prevent a poor imitation of that social unit from being created for the first time in human history (I am speaking of the era not the moment).  

Established rights?  Oh, please.  The right did not exist previously in US society and it remains a novel social construct that has no resemblance to an actual family unit, the purpose of which is to procreate and raise children.  

I think what is being rejected is the farce of how "evil" the Church was and its members.  Whining about denying gay rights - the rights never existed and the only reason they were granted is by an activist judiciary rather than a desire of state or nation.  As I said before, I wish the LDS Church was even 10% as powerful as we are made out to be.  I wish we had the same ability in our missionary labors to bring converts into the Church.  

I just find it comical that this little tine group is completely responsible for Prop 8 passing - no one else was there just the Mormons.  It is not rational, it is not logical, but when you have individuals going out of their way to even make documentaries about it, you know something is up.  I don't think it is charity and love that are motivating factors.  

[rockpond]

4 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

What rights did the Church strip.  There was no established right for the gays to be married.  You can't strip a right if it was not there to begin with.

Gay marriage was legally recognized in Californa prior to Prop 8.  Prop 8 removed that right for gay couples until it was struck down as unconstitutional. 

Edited May 22, 2016 by rockpond

[jkwilliams]

31 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

It is evident that the LDS Church is the scapegoat.  I don't think anyone can legitimately state otherwise.  There is no doubt, nor is a desire, to deflect the responsibility for the actions of the both the Church and its members.  Those that participated, I suspect, don't have one iota of regret for taking a stand for the human family and from seeking to prevent a poor imitation of that social unit from being created for the first time in human history (I am speaking of the era not the moment).  

Established rights?  Oh, please.  The right did not exist previously in US society and it remains a novel social construct that has no resemblance to an actual family unit, the purpose of which is to procreate and raise children.  

I think what is being rejected is the farce of how "evil" the Church was and its members.  Whining about denying gay rights - the rights never existed and the only reason they were granted is by an activist judiciary rather than a desire of state or nation.  As I said before, I wish the LDS Church was even 10% as powerful as we are made out to be.  I wish we had the same ability in our missionary labors to bring converts into the Church.  

I just find it comical that this little tine group is completely responsible for Prop 8 passing - no one else was there just the Mormons.  It is not rational, it is not logical, but when you have individuals going out of their way to even make documentaries about it, you know something is up.  I don't think it is charity and love that are motivating factors.  

Why the ridiculous straw men? Who's saying it was all the Mormons? We're not talking about Mormons being evil, just disputing the obvious untruth that the church's efforts were minuscule.

And why do you say that rights established by the California Supreme Court were not established rights?

Edited May 22, 2016 by jkwilliams

[rodheadlee]

15 hours ago, california boy said:

Your legal opinion is duly noted. In regards to civil rights of gays to marry, the fact that every federal judge in the country as well as the Supreme Court of the United States does fortunately have more legal weight.

It's not a legal opinion, it's a fact of life I learned in Maritime school last week. The USCG has jurisdiction. I don't have the same civil rights as you.

Edited May 22, 2016 by rodheadlee

[sjdawg]

5 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

What rights did the Church strip.  There was no established right for the gays to be married.  You can't strip a right if it was not there to begin with.

really?  Before Prop 8 did Gay people have the right to marry in California?   Yes they did.  Prop 8 took that away

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, rockpond said:

Gay marriage was legally recognized in Californa prior to Prop 8.  Prop 8 removed that right for gay couples until it was struck down as unconstitutional. 

People in certain states used to have the legal right to own slaves (until someone took that right away) for example. We agree now that the legal right to own slaves was never a civil right though. 

It's clear that Prop 8 took away a legal right. Whether or not Prop 8 took away a civil right isn't clear. 

Edited May 22, 2016 by bluebell