« Homosexuality Issue Splitting Methodists | Main | Mormon Enigma, Part 3 »

Comments

This statement did nothing for me in firmly establishing where the Church stands on gay marriage. The language used is very open-ended and leaves open the possibility for so many things.

I posted yeaterday about it.

http://kmsiever.blogspot.com/2004/07/first-presidency-statement-on-marriage.html

I agree. I really don't think anyone in LDS leadership favors civil unions for same-sex couples, my post is really exploring how general and unfocused the recent one-sentence statement really is. Given the Church's deep involvement with the evolving institution of marriage in the past and present, everyone tries to parse any official statement very carefully.

if you believe that no one "in LDS leadership favors civil unions for same-sex couples,"

What does that tell you, if anything, about:

1. The general membership of the Church on this issue?; and
2. my views on the issue; and
3. your views on the issue ???

Lyle, try fleshing out what you see as the link between what the Big 15 think (individually or as a group) and what that implies for what any given member should therefore think. I would guess all 15 vote Republican--what does that mean? I imagine none of them read science fiction in their spare time--what does that mean? I doubt any of them have any moral qualms about eating a fat, juicy steak--what does that mean? Were any of them to be practicing vegetarians--what would that mean?

I don't know about voting records, but James E. Faust is reportedly a registered Democrat, and I've heard that President Hinckley is, too.

Kim says: "This statement did nothing for me in firmly establishing where the Church stands on gay marriage. The language used is very open-ended and leaves open the possibility for so many things."

I think that's quite the point. By keeping the language open-ended, the Church can then turn one way or the other, or simply decline to be embroiled in the debate if it gets too heated. Vague language may not help us much in trying to decypher where the Church does stand on the issue, but it's quite handy for the Church.

Ditto Arwyn. I think that the Church does not want to become tied to any specific proposal or cause but support the overall result. As today's Senate vote shows, there is still a lot of disagreement on the pro-Amendment side on what is the best apporach. It is obviously going to be a long process if any amendment is passed. This is the way it was meant to be. The Church has gone on the record and will no doubt have more to say as the debate develops. No doubt there will be more court decisions that will keep this issue in the spotlight.

President Faust was a Democrat as state senator (I believe) in the '50/60's. Back then a majority of the state of Utah was Democrat. Of course, both Presidents Faust and Hinckley could still be Democrats for all we know (as my wife likes to tease me :-) ).

The Church has certainly tried to show that faithful Saints can be of both parties.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Now Reading

Blog powered by Typepad

General Books 09-12

General Books 06-08

General Books 04-05

About This Site

Mormon Books 2013-14

Mormon Books 2012

Science Books

Bible Books

Mormon Books 09-11

Mormon Books 2008

Mormon Books 2007

Mormon Books 2006

Mormon Books 2005

Religion Books 09-12

Religion Books 2008

Religion Books 2004-07