Are Mormon historians rewriting history, what is the truth?

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Whatever.  You can think of me as you want.  I think I have been very clear in my comments.  If you want to continue to think that the church has done nothing to take away the civil rights for gays to marry, then fine.  If you want to continue to believe that the church treats children of gay couples in a Christ-like way, then fine.  Am I a critic of that?  ABSOLUTELY.  I don't think that is any big secret.  

Of course I never said either of those things

As usual, more distortions AND as usual, you have never addressed what I DO say. 

Edited December 31, 2016 by mfbukowski

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, rockpond said:

I believe it has been discussed on this board too many times to even try to guess "where I was" for each of those discussions.

I didn't suggest that "the LDS Church has so few members in California that it is preposterous to suggest that we dominated the campaign there -- either in numbers or money".  The data seems to show that the time and money Mormons contributed far outweighed our small percentage of the population.  I've read estimates that put the total funds contributed by LDS persons at over half the total amount raised to support the amendment.  Combine that with our involvement in NOM and the Protect Marriage coalition and I think it is safe to say that if the LDS Church didn't lead the campaign it was certainly one of the primary leaders.  That is the point that I've been trying to make.  Why do you feel the need to diminish our role?

And yes, there is huge irony that we were once terribly persecuted for our beliefs regarding marriage that we would then turn around and be the persecutors.  Shocking and sad irony.

I am not interested in either diminishing or exaggerating the level of participation of Mormons in the Prop 8 movement.  People talk loosely of "estimates" and "data," but consider the source of that data -- those who already hate the Mormons.  True, the Mormons were well organized and did contribute money far more per capita than other groups, but that is always the case with Mormons.  Even so, the oh so small Mormon population could not equal the huge contributions made by the anti-Prop 8 forces, nor the huge population of evangelical, Black, and Catholic Churches arrayed in favor.  Roman Catholic priests even preached Prop 8 from the pulpit, something not done by the Mormons.  A majority of Californians voted in favor, just as a majority of Americans voted in favor of Hillary.  That it meant nothing in the long run is a fact of our arcane political process, and we all need to accept the final results with equanimity.  That is the adult thing to do, I think.  For, as we all know, this is a time of transition.  As for the irony being "sad," well, maybe not.  Why aren't we all toasting the victors, and smiling broadly that civil liberties are widened yet again.  I think that we are now just where we need to be, and that Reynolds v. the United States will soon be reversed (depending of course on what sort of monster gets appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017).  

Edited December 31, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

When the church provides 50% of the money to finance Prop 8 and 80-90% of the manpower, I call that leading the campaign for Prop 8.  I would also again recommend you watch "8: The Mormon Proposition."  No other church, no other organization, no other person is so identified with Prop 8 like the Mormon church.  Honestly, I can't see how you can dispute these facts.  If you can show me a church or organization or individual that did more to pass Prop 8 than the Mormon church, then I will withdraw my  statement.  If you can not provide such information, then I ask you to withdraw your assertion.  

From Wikipedia

I have never claimed that the Catholic church and other churches were not involved in passing Prop 8.  What I have asserted, and what the facts show, is the lead that the Mormon Church took in passing Prop 8.  Falsely calling me a hater does nothing to dispute these facts.

And Robert, I NEVER said that the church violated any laws.  I never said that the church did not have a right to participate in the democratic process.  In fact, I have numerous times affirmed their very right to do so.  That is not in dispute here.  It never was.  I don't know why you continue to attack me personally and put words in my mouth, but I try to be as clear as I can in stating the facts and provide support when those facts are called into question.  Me not being willing to pretend that the church was not the major force both financially and in manpower does not mean I hate the church.  What it means is that I will not allow you or anyone else to rewrite history.  The church has done too much of that already.

You talk about the rewriting of history, and cite Wikipedia as your authority, but I see the opposite -- that anti-Mormons are bound and determined to exaggerate the impact of the LDS Church on the Prop 8 campaign in California.  I know of plenty of excellent and faithful Mormon historians who are only too willing to tell the truth no matter the consequences.  To suggest that the Mormons supplied 80-90% of the manpower behind Prop 8 is laughable.  I was there and observed the Mormons participating all right, but never in such numbers.  California has a population of around 39 million now, and the Mormons population of California is only 774,000 members, which is less than 2% of the overall population.  Perhaps around the same percentage in 2008.  Reminds me of Hitler blaming Germany's troubles on the Jews, who were less than one-half of one percent of the German population.  But they made excellent scapegoats.  Gotta blame somebody, and Nazi propaganda was certainly up to the task.  The Germans loved Kristallnacht and everything that came after . . .

[mfbukowski]

48 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I am not interested in either diminishing or exaggerating the level of participation of Mormons in the Prop 8 movement.  People talk loosely of "estimates" and "data," but consider the source of that data -- those who already hate the Mormons.  True, the Mormons were well organized and did contribute money far more per capita than other groups, but that is always the case with Mormons.  Even so, the oh so small population could not equal the huge contributions made by the anti-Prop 8 forces, nor the huge population of evangelical, Black, and Catholic Churches arrayed in favor.  Roman Catholic priests even preached Prop 8 from the pulpit, something not done by the Mormons.  A majority of Californians voted in favor, just as a majority of Americans voted in favor of Hillary.  That it meant nothing in the long run is a fact of our arcane political process, and we all need to accept the final results with equanimity.  That is the adult thing to do, I think.  For, as well all know, this is a time of transition.  As for the irony being "sad," well, maybe not.  Why aren't we all toasting the victors, and smiling broadly that civil liberties are widened yet again.  I think that we are now just where we need to be, and that Reynolds v. the United States will soon be reversed (depending of course on what sort of monster gets appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017).  

I have seen in my own ward that the Democrat's continuing attacks and ridicule of Trump in the media are simply making the situation worse

For some odd reason they do not seem to understand that half the population actually did vote for Trump and what the progressives are doing is further alienating those folks who voted for him and pushing them farther away from making some kind of consensus possible while the Dems are in the minority.   Yes Hillary got more votes, but then Republicans have the House and the Senate- if she had won, her ability to pass legislation would still be seriously compromised. By no means would it have been anything close to a "mandate" even if she had won the electoral college.  Like it or not, the country made it clear what direction they wanted to go.

And as you point out Dems need to face the facts that the Supreme Court will be conservative for years to come, largely due to Democrats underestimating Trump's strength and the frustration of the "silent majority".  They keep shooting themselves in the foot.  They just could not face the facts as they were presenting themselves because they were so immersed in the superiority of position, which turned out not to be so superior.  It was pure smugness 

They argue that military action in Syria will cause the population there to further radicalize but do not understand that their continued ridicule of the right drives the majority of our population further to the right, essentially making them also more "radicalized"!

I have seen in my ward some disgust with Trump now moderating his positions apparently- these folks want to rub their victory in the Dem's faces, but the Dems still don't get it.  It's over.

I am a salesman and I know that if you are selling a product like liberalism you don't insult those you want to convert, but that is exactly what the Dems continue to do.

If people do not like what you are selling, you adjust your product, you just do not yell louder about it

It just boggles my mind to see how stupid a strategy this is.  

 I have heard Dems talking about a civil war, while they are in the minority and advocate gun control.  

Think about that one. But of course they know what is better for everyone else in the country.

Go figure.  The hubris is mind boggling.

Edited December 31, 2016 by mfbukowski

[carbon dioxide]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

When the church provides 50% of the money to finance Prop 8 and 80-90% of the manpower, I call that leading the campaign for Prop 8.  I would also again recommend you watch "8: The Mormon Proposition."  No other church, no other organization, no other person is so identified with Prop 8 like the Mormon church. 

How much did it really matter anyway.  More money was spend tying to defeat Prop 8 and Prop 8 passed.  So it the results was based on money spent, Prop 8 should have been defeated.  Gay marriage was defeated in a vote a few years earlier.  It was going down in flames throughout the country when it was voted on.   I see no reason to believe that Prop 8 would have been any different based on prior results and what was going on around the country.  Even if the LDS Church did not get involved, it still would have passed.  The LDS Church was just a scapegoat for those who supported SSM to beat on out of frustration.  I still believe that if the people in California voted again even today, it probably would not win.  People say one thing in public polls and another thing when they vote.  They did that in this last election as well.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

.........................................................................

Go figure.  The hubris is mind boggling.

Yeh, the ironies keep piling up on top of each other.

[california boy]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You talk about the rewriting of history, and cite Wikipedia as your authority, but I see the opposite -- that anti-Mormons are bound and determined to exaggerate the impact of the LDS Church on the Prop 8 campaign in California.  I know of plenty of excellent and faithful Mormon historians who are only too willing to tell the truth no matter the consequences.  To suggest that the Mormons supplied 80-90% of the manpower behind Prop 8 is laughable.  I was there and observed the Mormons participating all right, but never in such numbers.  California has a population of around 39 million now, and the Mormons population of California is only 774,000 members, which is less than 2% of the overall population.  Perhaps around the same percentage in 2008.  Reminds me of Hitler blaming Germany's troubles on the Jews, who were less than one-half of one percent of the German population.  But they made excellent scapegoats.  Gotta blame somebody, and Nazi propaganda was certainly up to the task.  The Germans loved Kristallnacht and everything that came after . . .

I am not going to argue with you what percentage of the money and labor the Mormon church contributed or whose source is more accurate.  It is a stupid defense.  This one fact is undeniable.   What is shameful is that the church did ANYTHING to take away ANYONE's civil rights whether it was legal for them to do so or not.  It was immoral for George Wallace to try to stop Blacks from being treated equally under the laws of this country.  And it was immoral for the Mormon church to try and stop gays from being treated equally under the laws of this country.  How the church treats gays within the church is their business.  Working to change the constitution of California to treat gays in a way that conforms to the churches religious beliefs is immoral.  Forcing people to comply with the laws of God is not part of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

What other laws of God should the Mormon church force people to follow by working to make it the law of the country?  Should the church force people to pay tithing?  Should the church force people to attend sacrament meeting?  Should the church force people to not divorce?  Is that not a moral issue?  Should the church force people to not live together with out marriage?  Isn't that a moral issue?  Or is it only the gays that should be forced to comply with Mormon beliefs.

Edited December 31, 2016 by california boy

[california boy]

9 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

How much did it really matter anyway.  More money was spend tying to defeat Prop 8 and Prop 8 passed.  So it the results was based on money spent, Prop 8 should have been defeated.  Gay marriage was defeated in a vote a few years earlier.  It was going down in flames throughout the country when it was voted on.   I see no reason to believe that Prop 8 would have been any different based on prior results and what was going on around the country.  Even if the LDS Church did not get involved, it still would have passed.  The LDS Church was just a scapegoat for those who supported SSM to beat on out of frustration.  I still believe that if the people in California voted again even today, it probably would not win.  People say one thing in public polls and another thing when they vote.  They did that in this last election as well.

Seriously?  Money and manpower are not important to winning elections?  That is your defense?  Without the church's involvement Prop 8 would have won anyway? Well maybe the church should have stayed completely out of the election then instead of working to force those outside the church to conform with their religious beliefs.  Maybe the church should have stuck to its own doctrine that REJECTED the concept of forcing people to comply with the laws of God.

The church strongly disagrees with your opinion btw.  See this link

Edited December 31, 2016 by california boy

[california boy]

11 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I have seen in my own ward that the Democrat's continuing attacks and ridicule of Trump in the media are simply making the situation worse

For some odd reason they do not seem to understand that half the population actually did vote for Trump and what the progressives are doing is further alienating those folks who voted for him and pushing them farther away from making some kind of consensus possible while the Dems are in the minority.   Yes Hillary got more votes, but then Republicans have the House and the Senate- if she had won, her ability to pass legislation would still be seriously compromised. By no means would it have been anything close to a "mandate" even if she had won the electoral college.  Like it or not, the country made it clear what direction they wanted to go.

And as you point out Dems need to face the facts that the Supreme Court will be conservative for years to come, largely due to Democrats underestimating Trump's strength and the frustration of the "silent majority".  They keep shooting themselves in the foot.  They just could not face the facts as they were presenting themselves because they were so immersed in the superiority of position, which turned out not to be so superior.  It was pure smugness 

They argue that military action in Syria will cause the population there to further radicalize but do not understand that their continued ridicule of the right drives the majority of our population further to the right, essentially making them also more "radicalized"!

I have seen in my ward some disgust with Trump now moderating his positions apparently- these folks want to rub their victory in the Dem's faces, but the Dems still don't get it.  It's over.

I am a salesman and I know that if you are selling a product like liberalism you don't insult those you want to convert, but that is exactly what the Dems continue to do.

If people do not like what you are selling, you adjust your product, you just do not yell louder about it

It just boggles my mind to see how stupid a strategy this is.  

 I have heard Dems talking about a civil war, while they are in the minority and advocate gun control.  

Think about that one. But of course they know what is better for everyone else in the country.

Go figure.  The hubris is mind boggling.

Well this is one thing I can agree with you on.  Donald Trump is our fairly elected president of the United States.  The Republicans control both the House and Senate. The government is theirs for the next 4 years.  The Democrats can do virtually nothing to stop the Republicans from implementing the kind of government Trump want.  I hope they use that power to make America a better place. I hope the majority of people in this country likes the kind of government Trump has promised to bring.  While it is not the kind of government I want, it seems to be the kind of government the majority wants.  Good luck to all.  I hope America is a better place.

[rockpond]

12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I am not interested in either diminishing or exaggerating the level of participation of Mormons in the Prop 8 movement.  People talk loosely of "estimates" and "data," but consider the source of that data -- those who already hate the Mormons.  True, the Mormons were well organized and did contribute money far more per capita than other groups, but that is always the case with Mormons.  Even so, the oh so small Mormon population could not equal the huge contributions made by the anti-Prop 8 forces, nor the huge population of evangelical, Black, and Catholic Churches arrayed in favor.  Roman Catholic priests even preached Prop 8 from the pulpit, something not done by the Mormons.  A majority of Californians voted in favor, just as a majority of Americans voted in favor of Hillary.  That it meant nothing in the long run is a fact of our arcane political process, and we all need to accept the final results with equanimity.  That is the adult thing to do, I think.  For, as we all know, this is a time of transition.  As for the irony being "sad," well, maybe not.  Why aren't we all toasting the victors, and smiling broadly that civil liberties are widened yet again.  I think that we are now just where we need to be, and that Reynolds v. the United States will soon be reversed (depending of course on what sort of monster gets appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017).  

You say that you aren't interested in diminishing the level of participation of Mormons in Prop 8, but then you do:  claiming that the data supporting members' herculean efforts comes from those "who already hate Mormons".

You falsely claim that our Church did not preach Prop 8 from the pulpit:  The First Presidency instructed a letter to be read in support of Prop 8 from the pulpit in every ward.  The Church broadcast a pro-Prop 8 program to all the stakes.  Per the New York Times, Mormons dominated the early canvassing work making up 80%-90% of the volunteers (from our 2% of the population).

Regarding the funds raised for Prop 8:  The 2% LDS population raised $20m while $19m was raised from non-LDS in favor of Prop 8.  Additionally, over 45% of the out-of-state contributions came from Utah.

You say that the "oh so small Mormon population could not equal the huge contributions made by the anti-Prop 8 forces".  This strikes me as an effort to diminish the LDS Church involvement when the reality is that the anti-Prop 8 efforts raised just $5m more than the pro-Prop 8.

As a Mormon, shouldn't you be happy about Reynolds being overturned?  Why refer to the potential appointee as a monster?

[readstoomuch]

14 hours ago, california boy said:

Whatever.  You can think of me as you want.  I think I have been very clear in my comments.  If you want to continue to think that the church has done nothing to take away the civil rights for gays to marry, then fine.  If you want to continue to believe that the church treats children of gay couples in a Christ-like way, then fine.  Am I a critic of that?  ABSOLUTELY.  I don't think that is any big secret.  

It is interesting that most threads derail to ssm or teenage girls married into polygamy 180 years ago.

i thought California boy, who i may not agree with, hit the nail on the head.  Basically how would Christ like us to treat ssm and the children of those associations.  The ssm coalition would emphasize Christ's greatest teachings to love one another.  That has required me and a number of others to show more compassion to many causes, including ssm.  The challenge for me and a number of others is that Jesus also taught about personal accountability and change as part of their interaction with Jesus.  That is the kicker.  How do we follow all of Christ's teachings?  That would include the teachings of his apostles and The Book of Mormon for LDS people.  You can argue all day about all of it, but unless this is really answered by all involved then you aren't getting to the meat of the argument.   Was Christ crucified and resurrected?  Did he establish a Church, give others input through the ages and then restore his gospel in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints?  What organization or organizations represents and carry out his will?  If we water down his word to not include any ordinance but "being saved'" what does that mean?  Can one be in a ssm and be saved?  If you disagree with what someone else says about what Christ would allow, is it wrong to take issue with it, even campaign against it?

i do think it is a slippery slope to water his teachings down to He loves everyone no matter what they do (though that is true), and you are not required to keep any basic commandment to enter into a covenant with him.