tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post5771412954254430018..comments2023-06-12T05:14:09.983-06:00Comments on our.eclectic.world: Proposition 8Torben Bhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04898308267210987998noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-87467251387357147402008-11-26T23:14:00.000-07:002008-11-26T23:14:00.000-07:00I just posted some more of my thoughts on same-sex...I just posted some more of my thoughts on same-sex marriage on my blog. Check it out and let me know what you think.<BR/><BR/>http://awbutler.blogspot.com/2008/11/some-thoughts-on-same-sex-marriage.htmlAaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01314336700575539413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-40205422191556352852008-11-18T23:29:00.000-07:002008-11-18T23:29:00.000-07:00I agree, but I also think it is equally naive to s...I agree, but I also think it is equally naive to say advice shouldn't be given to inform people who want to engage in inter-racial marriage about social ramifications etc. Also it's important to separate individual quotes from brethren from an official church stance. The church hasn't taken an official stance opposing inter-racial marriage. It has against same-sex marriage. I think the Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01314336700575539413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-1367624082831437342008-11-18T13:55:00.000-07:002008-11-18T13:55:00.000-07:00Thanks for the research...and good post. Yeah...I ...Thanks for the research...and good post. Yeah...I agree with you - I don't think that necessarily makes it better (it only applying to African-Americans)...if anything, a bit more confusing, disturbing, strange, meaningless...(as you said).<BR/><BR/>Also, I was very struck by the statement: "it was a process that had prophets contradicting past prophets and required a unanimous vote BEFORE the Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-23568662342944200952008-11-18T13:38:00.000-07:002008-11-18T13:38:00.000-07:00i think it's interesting that the FIRST time it wa...i think it's interesting that the FIRST time it was brought to vote was 1969, five years after the Civil Rights Act. And the fact that it took nearly ten years after that is mind blowing. <BR/><BR/>i love how people often try to soften the interracial blow by saying that it was "only blacks." :) Truth is, i've read articles and talks about the way my marriage was viewed by leaders in the 60s and Torben Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04898308267210987998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-91499763331597748172008-11-18T05:04:00.000-07:002008-11-18T05:04:00.000-07:00O.K. Men. I've done a bit of research (courtesey o...O.K. Men. I've done a bit of research (courtesey of Greg Prince's book on David O. McKay and Dialogue) and it turns out that the ban on interracial temple marriages only applied to blacks. It did not apply to Hispanics or those of Asian descent; although, those marriages were discouraged, sometimes lovingly (Kimball) and sometimes in a very ugly way (Apostle Mark E. Petersen).<BR/><BR/>I don't Hbernbubbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01554845036213382630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-80115940668923703962008-11-15T23:01:00.000-07:002008-11-15T23:01:00.000-07:00I don't know much about the churches stance on int...I don't know much about the churches stance on inter-racial marriages, but I've never heard of the church supporting legislature against such a marriage, nor have I heard of those marriages being banned by temples. All I have heard is the brethren strongly suggesting against inter-racial marriages (I think it is a fairly wise thing to advice, especially given that time period's attitude toward Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01314336700575539413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-20620423201003189842008-11-15T15:20:00.000-07:002008-11-15T15:20:00.000-07:00You mean, like, umm...me? :)You mean, like, umm...me? :)Torben Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04898308267210987998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-2439806624949155842008-11-15T15:13:00.000-07:002008-11-15T15:13:00.000-07:00p.s.just to clarify...that last comment was direct...p.s.<BR/>just to clarify...that last comment was directed toward Aaron, just wanted to make that clear as there was a personal reference about marriage, and it may have been construed as being unclear about who I was referring to...Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-70081941747729580052008-11-15T15:09:00.000-07:002008-11-15T15:09:00.000-07:00The church also took this same stance in its histo...The church also took this same stance in its history (particularly the 50s/60s/70s) when they were opposing interracial marriage...nowadays that is an embarrassing thing for Mormons. Did you know that your own marriage would have been disallowed and invalidated by the LDS church 30 years ago!? It wasn't until 1978 that the church allowed interracial marriage in the temple.<BR/><BR/>And I'm Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-78661949613054100552008-11-14T23:35:00.000-07:002008-11-14T23:35:00.000-07:00The Church took this same stance ten years ago whe...The Church took this same stance ten years ago when Californians voted on this same issue (prop 22 or something like that). I remember the church handing out signs and everything. The Church has been consistent in staying out of politics. They have taken on this issue (both then and now) for reasons that are obviously beyond your willingness to understand or maybe even acknowledge. <BR/><BR/>Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01314336700575539413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-42532694997414207492008-11-14T01:33:00.000-07:002008-11-14T01:33:00.000-07:00Anonymous/Uncle...I have to interject with what yo...Anonymous/Uncle...<BR/><BR/>I have to interject with what you are saying...at least in your first comment. Your argument exists only within the Mormon context, so it should stay there. Your argument is not academic, it is doctrinal...citing and discussing only Mormons and Mormon issues. I am not Mormon, so your argument doesn't apply to me. Nor does it apply to most of the folks that this Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-58651185612408603482008-11-13T12:35:00.000-07:002008-11-13T12:35:00.000-07:00I think there is an important difference between m...I think there is an important difference between macro and micro involvement on such issues. It is the genius of Joseph Smith's work - to diffuse rather than concentrate power. <BR/><BR/>The Church will orchestrate and implement macro positioning. Such involves managing the radical right and left, from hate groups on both ends of the continuum. It also addresses the national and international Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-47453647165637749062008-11-13T11:04:00.000-07:002008-11-13T11:04:00.000-07:00What is peculiar about following the dominant view...What is peculiar about following the dominant view that homosexuals should not be given the right to marry? i don't see anything peculiar about that at all. In fact, to me it seems indicative of the church's constant attempts to blend in with the mainstream. Well, if you consider Christian fundamentalist groups (who can't stand us, btw) to be the mainstream. <BR/><BR/>i'll write more later if i Torben Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04898308267210987998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-89163246416742618012008-11-13T03:17:00.000-07:002008-11-13T03:17:00.000-07:00Jeff, thank you for posting. I think it is healthy...Jeff, thank you for posting. I think it is healthy and certainly good to hear another perspective here. A couple of thoughts, you wrote that the ‘time of the Osmonds is over.’ The strange thing about that statement for me is that while we might have further estranged ourselves from the secular world, which we arguably have never been a part of, we have aligned ourselves much more closely with Hbernbubbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01554845036213382630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-63628943325208286882008-11-11T19:59:00.000-07:002008-11-11T19:59:00.000-07:00I hesitate to make a comment here. Much has been ...I hesitate to make a comment here. Much has been already written. The voting is over. I am confident that the legal battle is only beginning. The ultimate constitutionality of prop 8 is not certain. Significant challenges may prove fatal to it.<BR/><BR/>I am inclined to engage in an academic debate. My personal research and study confirms my position. Yet converting others to a different Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-74132811615991347082008-11-05T19:19:00.000-07:002008-11-05T19:19:00.000-07:00Errin - word to that! Very well said, and rather h...Errin - word to that! Very well said, and rather humbling (can I say that word without being a Christian ;) ?), especially so after a rather tense argument. I think you hit the nail right on its head.Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-23350527458101577792008-11-05T10:01:00.000-07:002008-11-05T10:01:00.000-07:00It seems like this discussion is at its close, but...It seems like this discussion is at its close, but I can't help but chime in. <BR/>First, I can see how there may be no "hard feelings" on Aaron's part; Prop 8, is unfortunately, likely to pass, and its passing doesn't directly affect his family or marriage.<BR/>However, I would imagine that for those people who are struggling with the fact that their marriages are being torn apart by this.<BR/>errin julkunen-pedersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05284818108824788788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-86510210668028279492008-11-05T01:10:00.000-07:002008-11-05T01:10:00.000-07:00You're right that I've primarily researched source...You're right that I've primarily researched sources from one side. Have you not done the same? Honestly? To be honest I haven't researched this issue that much, but have indeed relied on others research. The only thing I have done is give it some thought and post about it. I personally think my opinions on this post hold ground. Any argument can be made to look bad especially when there's Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01314336700575539413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-742818705364929112008-11-05T00:30:00.000-07:002008-11-05T00:30:00.000-07:00I haven't decided to turn you into a caricature, I...I haven't decided to turn you into a caricature, I don't even know you. I'm operating off of the substance of your arguments.<BR/><BR/>The articles you site are bona-fide propaganda and slanted rhetoric...do some research! For being a "scientist"...I haven't seen a coherent or rational argument on your part. You keep referring to these awful articles online that are just espousing a single view Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-25352305012044812732008-11-04T23:53:00.000-07:002008-11-04T23:53:00.000-07:00If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and w...If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's probably a duck.Dave and Shandiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10293514816579073655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-8612090091858297462008-11-04T23:40:00.000-07:002008-11-04T23:40:00.000-07:00I think that you grossly misunderstand my position...I think that you grossly misunderstand my position.<BR/><BR/>Of course there is more to this than legal ramifications. Wherever homosexual marriage has been legalized the citizens of those countries devalue marriage, less people get married, and this in turn has many detrimental effects on children, abuse, poverty. I am opposed to anything that would lessen the importance of something as Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01314336700575539413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-70378304632062938562008-11-04T17:05:00.000-07:002008-11-04T17:05:00.000-07:00p.s.Your assertions and worries that legalizing sa...p.s.<BR/>Your assertions and worries that legalizing same-sex marriage will carry on an influence in schools and other institutions in society presupposes that there is a movement of homosexuals and other groups spearheading a cause to convince others to become homosexual. THIS IS ABSURD! How or why would anyone be interested in trying to convince another person to espouse their own sexuality. Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-13220127404310825592008-11-04T16:48:00.000-07:002008-11-04T16:48:00.000-07:00Aaron,I can't help but think that the issue runs f...Aaron,<BR/><BR/>I can't help but think that the issue runs far deeper for you than simply 'legal ramifications'. I think that you are disguising the issue. Your view that homosexual marriages should be civilly separated (by title), but then also somehow civilly equal has the same inherent problems as racial segregation...("separate but equal"). I encourage you to review that paradigm and see how Grabloidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00145436944422987383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-18361197961202617832008-11-04T11:05:00.000-07:002008-11-04T11:05:00.000-07:00I took a Law & Religion class this past summer...I took a Law & Religion class this past summer. It covered all the major US Supreme Court and State Supreme Court cases involving religious material. There was one dominant theme throughout the textbook and our lectures: that American Mainstream Christian religions receive exemptions from laws that affect their religious practices nearly 100% of the time. Other religions and fray Christian Dave and Shandiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10293514816579073655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29037444.post-70219320460336791582008-11-04T03:53:00.000-07:002008-11-04T03:53:00.000-07:00O.K. I've checked out your legal expert and then f...O.K. I've checked out your legal expert and then found a rebuttal to that from Thurston and it goes on and on. Here is what I can say with some authority -- various lawyers are interpreting the law differently. Just as we are interpreting the moral implications of Prop 8 differently. (On a sidenote, I have started getting serious flashbacks to the whole intelligent design debate; the tactics and Hbernbubbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01554845036213382630noreply@blogger.com