« A Few Good Posts | Main | Net Beats Out Newspaper »

Comments

Thanks for covering this.

I've got a YouTube up of the CBS5 report:

My Favorite Mormons: Steve & Barb Young Vote No on 8


Wow, this is pretty interesting. I have to say, of all the high-profile Mormons out there, I would not have expected Young to come out against Prop 8.

In addition to providign cover to "No on 8" Latter-day Saints, I think the Youngs also send a message to those outside the Church that we are not a monolithic voting bloc. Which I think is a good message to get out.

Steve Young is a total stud.

I imagine that Young's bishop will leave him alone, as he should. Note to all Californian bishops: do thou likewise.

That's unfortunate. It's his choice though.

That is sad. I can find no reason why a mormon could vote against prop 8 in good conscience with their faith. It is simply impossible. It is a denial of their religious beliefs on many fronts.

Barbara is one involved in the No on 8 campaign, not Steve.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10871535

I think Johnna is right in terms of Barbara being the one who feels passionately about this issue.

That said, the fact that Steve is most likely ambivalent makes it even more powerful, because I'm sure there were family discussions, and he ultimately Put His Family First.

With a little humble retrospection, I think most adults would admit that what we mostly wanted as kids was to feel that we came first in our parents' lives. Heck, even as adults in adult relationships, what more could we ask for than to feel that our spouse or partner put their consideration for us above all else?

Anyway, until I hear different, Barb's a star and Steve's a class act in my book.

And this is me promoting my diary over at Pam's House Blend.

Permalink

Yes! There are still true Christians among California Mormons and that is always good to know.

We must all learn from the Young family and stop hating, discriminating and trying to take others' rights.

I supported Christ's plan of agency in the preexistence, and I support it in this life!

NO TO PROP 8!!! No to Lucifer's plan! No to hate and discrimination! No to oppression!!!

Ridi,

That is because some members are worthy of the Holy Ghost and can discern between uninspired politics of men with war era background.

These are the people who would have stood against their leaders when Mormons planned the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Victor,

"I supported Christ's plan of agency in the preexistence, and I support it in this life!"

I must have fallen asleep when same-sex marriage was covered during the Premortal Council. Was that before or after we voted to ban unicorns?

This makes my heart light and happy.

And you must fall asleep every single time you go to the temple (assuming you go) because judging by your comment, you don't understand anything about agency.

Letting people choose for themselves doesn't translate to "supporting their decisions." That's just a politics trick to manipulate the masses, you should know...

And guess what, yes, gay marriage IS COVERED by the law of FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

Whatever. He didn't go on a mission and didn't get married until his 30's and worked on Sundays. Probably drinks Coke and watches rated R movies and votes Democrat too. What a great example.

And I heard that in his NFL days he only payed tithing on his net income.

I bet he also takes the Sacrament on occasion with his LEFT hand, forgets to remove his hat for prayer on ward campouts, and forgot to put his hand over his heart at the last Cub Scout Blue and Gold banquet.

You should totally tell his bishop mike d.

"you must fall asleep every single time you go to the temple"

I plead the fifth.

"yes, gay marriage IS COVERED by the law of FREEDOM OF CHOICE."

If we were talking about criminalizing homosexual acts then your argument might make sense. But we're not, and it doesn't.

San Francisco will still be San Francisco. They just won't need as much space in the local paper for wedding announcements.

How fortunate we are to have Victor the Antinomian paying us a visit.

and forgot to put his hand over his heart at the last Cub Scout Blue and Gold banquet.
That's because he never got his Eagle Scout.

of course they can choose to do so... that's their right. that's what agency is all about.
however, you're forgetting that there are consequences for the use of our agency.
take for instance this commandment; Thou shalt not kill
It's a law, and it's prohibited. Just like the commandment.
Does God take away our agency to kill someone? Does the state take away our agency to murder our neighbor?
NO. there are consequences, that's all. still a matter of choice.
now, let people choose same-sex relationships all they want... all we're saying with a Yes vote on Prop 8 is that they will accept the consequence of not having the title of marriage. deal with it.
they still have their rights, and they still have their agency.
i chose Christ's plan.
and just in case YOU were asleep in sunday school - EVERYONE on this planet did!

People, grow up and accept the fact that life is about choices and consequences (i.e. agency), not about the freedom to do whatever the hell we want, for tomorrow we die. (sound familiar?)

I wonder why people are attacking the righteousness/unrighteousness of Steve Young?

mind you, that even with a Yes vote on Prop 8, same-sex partners still have ALL the civil rights of everyone else.

and by the way, steve young's still a good guy... just made an unexpected choice. who knows what his reasons are. who knows how he paid his tithing, and why do you care?

mind you, that even with a Yes vote on Prop 8, same-sex partners still have ALL the civil rights of everyone else.

and by the way, steve young's still a good guy... just made an unexpected choice. who knows what his reasons are. who knows how he paid his tithing, and why do you care?


Yep, just like blacks had drinking fountains and seats on the bus that worked just as well as the ones for whites. Why on earth would they be offended at that?

And Brother Young's personal righteousness matters because if he was living up to every commandment then there's no way he could ever of formed an independent opinion on a matter like this, and would have exercised his priesthood authority in telling his wife to shut up and follow the prophet.

mike d.,

And Brother Young's personal righteousness matters because if he was living up to every commandment then there's no way he could ever of formed an independent opinion on a matter like this, and would have exercised his priesthood authority in telling his wife to shut up and follow the prophet.

ARe you being serious or sarcastic? If you are being serious, you really don't see the inherent contradiction in your statement.

I am ambivalent about the whole prop no 8 affair in California. I couldn't care less either way...

But, I do roll my eyes at people trying to equate the plight of gays being unable to get an official stamp that says their relationship is recognized under the law with the civil rights era and the oppression of blacks. There is NO comparison. None.

Are gays allowed to vote? Hold property? Travel on the interstates? Stay at hotels where they want to stay at? Eat at restaurants? Are they lynched?

people who try to link the two are disingenuous at best, ignorant at worst.

Stick to the salient arguments for allowing it without resorting to hyperbole...

I am black, I am straight, and I DO think there's a good comparison. Quite simply, gay marriage is a civil rights issue.

Before Loving v. the State of Virginia, it was illegal in many states for a black and a white person to marry each other. By denying two consenting adults the right to marry the person of his/her choice--and particularly the right to marry someone to whom one is attracted and feels romantic love--a very clear message is being sent. This hateful message says that only one kind of love is worth categorizing as "fully married" or "fully acceptable." People who don't qualify for that term are "otherized" as not fully adult, human, worthy of the same kind of relationship.

Those who claim gays should never marry are consigning them to a life of forced celibacy, or stating that they are never, ever to have any kind of romantic or sexual experience. Unless the designers of that rule are willing and able to also abstain for their entire lives, they should not have the right to make such pronouncements.

Steve Young? Bah. What I want to know is, how is Kirby Heyborne voting?

I'm with JimD.

*Yawn*

I think that those who are against this proposition forget that in the early days of our Union, state laws exacted punishment of death upon gays. Go take a look at state laws in like Virginia, Connecticut, etc.

Way to go Barb & Steve!!!

I'm in Steve's ward, and none of you have any idea what's going on. This is Barbara's thing.

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