Media Portrayals

[Stormin' Mormon]

53 minutes ago, california boy said:

Sorry for being a bit sharp, but this issue has been gone over so many times on this forum and it is something that happened  14 years ago.  I just think that if someone was really interested in why the Church has taken so much heat over what they did to pass Prop 8, they would have found out by now.  

Never the less, this is the data from Protect Marriage.  Protect Marriage was the organization that ran the Yes on 8 campaign.  So it is not coming from the opposition to Prop 8, but rather the actual organization (set up by the Church) to run the campaign.

 

When people talk about the Mormon proposition, they are talking about such a huge percentage of the campaign that all came from members of the Church.  Political campaigns are crucial to getting people elected and propositions passing.  It was the members that owned the campaign and did all the heavy lifting.  It is why so many look to the Mormons as being responsible for Prop 8 passing.

Hope that helps.  If you have more questions, feel free to PM me.  I am happy to provide more information if I can, but I am not interested in participating in yet another thread on this issue.

Fair enough and thanks. 

I derailed myself on this topic, since the LDS involvement on Prop 8 was only of passing interest to me. I shouldn't have even mentioned it in my original reply to you.

What I really wanted to explore was your comment that the Church's wholesome image changed after Prop 8. Although I mentioned that angle in my earlier reply, I didn't stay focused on it.

I would contend that Prop 8 was primarily a watershed moment in how society perceived SSM, and only secondarily a change in how it perceived the LDS church.

The church didnt change much before or after Prop 8, in neither policy, practice, nor doctrine. The church's involvement might have been different in degree, but not in kind, and it followed the trajectory of past church involvement in this policy area. If it was an escalation, it was only because the stage was bigger. Rather than legal briefs in a courtroom in a small state, it was a political campaign in the most populous state in the union.

So if perception of the Church changed it isn't because the church had changed, but because the Church hadn't changed. I am amazed at how rapidly same sex marriage became widely accepted, both legally and socially, in the wake of the Windsor decision. Windsor was decided nine years ago. By comparison  nine years after Brown, we were still two years away from the Civil Rights Act, which wasn't even the end of that particular road.

So, if Prop 8 was a turning point in LDS perception, it was because it was also a turning point in SSM perception. Absent that latter change, the Church would still have its wholesome family-friendly image in tact.

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Stormin' Mormon

[Meadowchik]

3 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Fair enough and thanks. 

I derailed myself on this topic, since the LDS involvement on Prop 8 was only of passing interest to me. I shouldn't have even mentioned it in my original reply to you.

What I really wanted to explore was your comment that the Church's wholesome image changed after Prop 8. Although I mentioned that angle in my earlier reply, I didn't stay focused on it.

I would contend that Prop 8 was primarily a watershed moment in how society perceived SSM, and only secondarily a change in how it perceived the LDS church.

The church didnt change much before or after Prop 8, in neither policy, practice, nor doctrine. The church's involvement might have been different in degree, but not in kind, and it followed the trajectory of past church involvement in this policy area. If it was an escalation, it was only because the stage was bigger. Rather than legal briefs in a courtroom in a small state, it was a political campaign in the most populous state in the union.

So if perception of the Church changed it isn't because the church had changed, but because the Church hadn't changed. I am amazed at how rapidly same sex marriage became widely accepted, both legally and socially, in the wake of the Windsor decision. Windsor was decided nine years ago. By comparison  nine years after Brown, we were still two years away from the Civil Rights Act, which wasn't even the end of that particular road.

So, if Prop 8 was a turning point in LDS perception, it was because it was also a turning point in SSM perception. Absent that latter change, the Church would still have its wholesome family-friendly image in tact.

 

To be fair, it's probably more accurate to say the church and its image changes continuously. 

The church discontinued legal live polygamy, and afterward went more mainstream in a Leave it to Beaver image.

One common mistake, I think, is to consider Leave it to Beaver as realistic or ideal...it does pigeonhole some and leave others out. 

So, society continues to change and in the wake of LGBT acceptance, the church issued the Proclamation and doubled down on its position against gay marriage. But it's also been changing in other ways since the wholesome image. 

Off the top of my head, the church has amassed tremendous wealth. It's also simplified and streamlined curriculums and eliminated activities. Very recently, it's shortened meeting times. The church has also been using data analysis to study the membership. I would say that in many ways it seems to be operating much more like a business.

On the other hand, in tension with the institution, the membership is also changing. Demographically it's becoming much less American, and growth rates are declining. But perhaps church members are also becoming more politically polarised. 

We see change like this less clearly from the personal level. It's hard to say how these will drive the church's future, generations from now, but I think we can say we have been witness to major changes that will ultimately direct it.

[california boy]

10 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Fair enough and thanks. 

I derailed myself on this topic, since the LDS involvement on Prop 8 was only of passing interest to me. I shouldn't have even mentioned it in my original reply to you.

What I really wanted to explore was your comment that the Church's wholesome image changed after Prop 8. Although I mentioned that angle in my earlier reply, I didn't stay focused on it.

I would contend that Prop 8 was primarily a watershed moment in how society perceived SSM, and only secondarily a change in how it perceived the LDS church.

The church didnt change much before or after Prop 8, in neither policy, practice, nor doctrine. The church's involvement might have been different in degree, but not in kind, and it followed the trajectory of past church involvement in this policy area. If it was an escalation, it was only because the stage was bigger. Rather than legal briefs in a courtroom in a small state, it was a political campaign in the most populous state in the union.

So if perception of the Church changed it isn't because the church had changed, but because the Church hadn't changed. I am amazed at how rapidly same sex marriage became widely accepted, both legally and socially, in the wake of the Windsor decision. Windsor was decided nine years ago. By comparison  nine years after Brown, we were still two years away from the Civil Rights Act, which wasn't even the end of that particular road.

So, if Prop 8 was a turning point in LDS perception, it was because it was also a turning point in SSM perception. Absent that latter change, the Church would still have its wholesome family-friendly image in tact.

 

I actually agree with everything you wrote.  The biggest change was how others viewed the Church. But that change in view, I think, really affected that image.  I think it was what started the name Mormon no longer being a positive name at least in California.  I say California because before this all happened, the Church had more of a positive perceived influence within the community and state.  Hard working, family oriented and honest people image changed to bigotry and attacking  image.  Whether that is fair or not is another discussion.  I think even people who still have a good opinion of the Church through close relationships with members are less likely to stand up for the Church because they see both sides of that reputation.

[california boy]

6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

To be fair, it's probably more accurate to say the church and its image changes continuously. 

The church discontinued legal live polygamy, and afterward went more mainstream in a Leave it to Beaver image.

One common mistake, I think, is to consider Leave it to Beaver as realistic or ideal...it does pigeonhole some and leave others out. 

So, society continues to change and in the wake of LGBT acceptance, the church issued the Proclamation and doubled down on its position against gay marriage. But it's also been changing in other ways since the wholesome image. 

Off the top of my head, the church has amassed tremendous wealth. It's also simplified and streamlined curriculums and eliminated activities. Very recently, it's shortened meeting times. The church has also been using data analysis to study the membership. I would say that in many ways it seems to be operating much more like a business.

On the other hand, in tension with the institution, the membership is also changing. Demographically it's becoming much less American, and growth rates are declining. But perhaps church members are also becoming more politically polarised. 

We see change like this less clearly from the personal level. It's hard to say how these will drive the church's future, generations from now, but I think we can say we have been witness to major changes that will ultimately direct it.

I agree that there are many different areas that have caused the change in how people perceive the Church.  I don't want to imply that it is only LGBT issues.

[ttribe]

Del.

Edited May 3, 2022 by ttribe

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Fair enough and thanks. 

I derailed myself on this topic, since the LDS involvement on Prop 8 was only of passing interest to me. I shouldn't have even mentioned it in my original reply to you.

What I really wanted to explore was your comment that the Church's wholesome image changed after Prop 8. Although I mentioned that angle in my earlier reply, I didn't stay focused on it.

I would contend that Prop 8 was primarily a watershed moment in how society perceived SSM, and only secondarily a change in how it perceived the LDS church.

The church didnt change much before or after Prop 8, in neither policy, practice, nor doctrine. The church's involvement might have been different in degree, but not in kind, and it followed the trajectory of past church involvement in this policy area. If it was an escalation, it was only because the stage was bigger. Rather than legal briefs in a courtroom in a small state, it was a political campaign in the most populous state in the union.

So if perception of the Church changed it isn't because the church had changed, but because the Church hadn't changed. I am amazed at how rapidly same sex marriage became widely accepted, both legally and socially, in the wake of the Windsor decision. Windsor was decided nine years ago. By comparison  nine years after Brown, we were still two years away from the Civil Rights Act, which wasn't even the end of that particular road.

So, if Prop 8 was a turning point in LDS perception, it was because it was also a turning point in SSM perception. Absent that latter change, the Church would still have its wholesome family-friendly image in tact.

 

I'm not sure if Prop 8 changed people's perception of the church or not, but I served in California a few years before Prop 8 and whenever we tracted into a gay person they would just say they weren't interested because they were gay.  So clearly we had a reputation among lgtbq people before prop. 8 for being against SS relationships.