I Support Proposition 8

I support Proposition 8. For those who are unfamiliar with this issue, it is a proposition that will be voted upon in California in November that seeks to define “marriage” as a union between only a man and a woman. This is taking place because California courts have recently attempted to redefine and pervert the traditional and correct definition of “marriage” in order to include same-sex partnerships.
For more information, click on the “Yes on 8” logo I have on the right side of the screen.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has recently taken a public stance on the issue, and they support Proposition 8. As members of the Church we believe “that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God” and that it is the only acceptable definition of “marriage.” There are LDS who disagree with the proposition, and their websites are accessible. Frankly, I don’t know how they can answer in the negative to the temple recommend question that asks about affiliating with groups whose teachings are contrary to those of the Church.

I disagree with the homosexual agenda, but I still respect the free agency of all of Heavenly Father’s children. By supporting Proposition 8 I am not limiting the rights of gays and lesbians to enjoy all the legal advantages of being a family. This is purely about the definition of “marriage.”

Some who disagree with my position sarcastically ask, “Can I vote on your marriage now?” I welcome any such vote. My marriage is understood by all nations and cultures throughout all of time to be a normal and acceptable union. There is no such thing as voting on “gay marriage” since the two words combined are by nature an oxymoron.

Some will say that allowing gay marriage will not affect our normal marriages or our lives. Here is why I disagree:

  • Unless Proposition 8 passes, California society will soon undergo a profound change in its basic understanding of marriage and family life that will affect everyone in numerous ways. Over time, greater acceptance of nontraditional marriage will be demanded of all people. This could impact the ability of any religion to teach and practice its beliefs.
  • Failure to pass Proposition 8 will hurt children. If same-sex marriage remains legal, public schools will put it on equal footing with traditional marriage. Children will likely receive “age appropriate” information about sexual relations within heterosexual and homosexual marriages.
  • Failure to pass Proposition 8 will hurt churches.The court’s decision will inevitably lead to conflicts with religious liberty and free speech rights. Society will become more and more hostile to traditional beliefs about marriage and family.

Here is a wonderful quote by Elder M. Russell Ballard:

Let me say again that the family is the main target of evil’s attack and must herefore be the main point of our protection and defense. As I said once before, when you stop and think about it from a diabolically tactical point of view, fighting the family makes sense to Satan. When he wants to disrupt the work of the Lord, he doesn’t poison the world’s peanut butter supply, thus bringing the Church’s missionary system to its collective knees. He doesn’t send a plague of laryngitis to afflict the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. He doesn’t legislate against green Jell-O and casseroles. When evil wants to strike out and disrupt the essence of God’s work, it attacks the family. It does so by attempting to disregard the law of chastity, to confuse gender, to desensitize violence, to make crude and blasphemous language the norm, and to make immoral and deviant behavior seem like the rule rather than the exception.

Ensign November 2003 – Let Our Voices Be Heard

I also like this quote by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D.:

Like murder, adultery, or stealing or any other sinful behavior, the act itself is wrong; it does not matter if the person has a biological predisposition toward violence, promiscuity, or thievery. Also, childhood environments or societies where such activities are commonplace do not change or redeem these forms of moral misconduct. The Church believes that these practices, regardless of the circumstances of the actor, are sins in the eyes of God.

This policy of “hate the sin; love the sinner” is challenged by a population of people who have declared that their sexual preference is as natural to them as their brown hair, blue eyes, or short toes. In a way that is uncommon among other individuals who choose not to abide by Church teachings, those who commit homosexual acts have banded together in colleges, lobbies, and neighborhoods to gain support on various campuses, in legislatures, and in communities. As a result of a political agenda, some people across America and the world have accepted the homosexual lifestyle. In stark contrast, the Church rejects all homosexual behavior in spite of political movements that advocate total acceptance.

And finally, in this video Elder Bednar makes some excellent points as he addresses some of the questions and concerns that people have about this issue.

If you would like, feel free to copy any portion of this post to include it in your own blog.

This entry was posted in ..

22 comments on “I Support Proposition 8

  1. Pedro says:

    The first and foremost thing tought in the Torah(Genesis-Duetoronomy), the first commandment ever given, was for Adam(a man) and Eve(a woman) to reproduce and raise children.
    I dont think “gay marriage” is about gay rights or equality at all. Its all about taking the Judeo-Christian tradition out of public life, to have it cease form being the bedrock of western morality. Its about moving our cultural capital from Jersualem to Athens. I wish “gay rights” supporters would be more honest about that.

  2. Huh says:

    What are we protecting marriage from? What makes you think that schools would put gay marriage on the same level as straight marriage? I don’t understand how it would impact religion? People who are or want to be religious are. People who don’t want to be religious are not. Do public schools teach all religions? Satan worshiping is one. How does defining marriage between a man and a woman damage religious liberty and free speech rights? How does proposition 8 damage ones ability to practice religion? People should be able to live their lives as they see fit. If Jack and John want to be married then they should be able to. If you want to practice a religion that says you have protective undergarments then you should be able to. Open your eyes. Instead of fighting the male/male female/female relationships you should support them. You would get a lot of people filling your ward. Happy people.

  3. James says:

    We are protecting the correct definition of “marriage.”

    What makes me think schools would put gay marriage on the same level as straight marriage? In San Francisco just this week 3rd graders were taken on a field trip to witness a gay marriage.

    It would impact religion for the reasons Elder Bednar explains.

    Your question about public schools teaching religion makes no sense, and is simply not relevant.

    How does defining marriage between a man and a woman damage religious liberty and free speech rights? As a Christian my beliefs would be called “discriminatory” or “persecuting.” I would no longer be free to express my disapproval of the act.

    “If Jack and John want to be married then they should be able to.” Well, there is reason God put Adam and Eve in the garden instead of Adam and Steve.

    Oh, and I don’t want people filling the pews at my ward if they are actively fighting against the things I believe in.

  4. Huh says:

    Is that the same level? How is taking kids on a field trip the same level?

    How is your Christian belief “discriminatory” or “persecuting”? You have every right, as you do now, to disapprove of any act. Voting yes on 8 won’t prohibit that.

    Adam and Eve? Why did god put them in the garden? Many people of religious backgrounds are gay. Many still believe in god even though they are gay.

    I don’t think people are actively fighting against the things you believe in. You are not a victim. You believe in protective undergarments. I don’t. Should I be “actively fighting” against the garments you believe in? No. People choose different paths in life.

  5. James says:


    In California it is law that the role of marriage in society be taught in public schools. By legislating that same-sex marriages be “legal” public schools will have to incorporate them into their curriculum. I was incorrect when I said that 3rd graders were taken on a field trip, it was 1st graders. It isn’t hard to see that such a field trip could be very confusing for a 1st grader, a 5-7 year old. Gender confusion is not something I want my children to have to face.

    Gay rights activists would seek to make this issue the new “civil rights” issue of the 21st century. They would like their cause to be seen as equal to that of the civil rights movements of the 20th century when blacks and women began receiving better treatement. Therefore, if I disagree on moral or religious grounds with the activities of same-sex couples I am at risk of being labeled something similar to a “racist” or a “sexist.” It would be something like “anti-gay.”
    You are kidding yourself if you believe that legalizing same-sex marriage is the last step that would be taken. Instead, it is the beginning of the end. More will come. Eventually it will be required by law that churches change their views on gays, that they allow gay marriages to be performed in their buildings, and that they stop teaching against the practice. In short, our free speech will be choked.
    Imagine the repurcussions if an “all-black” church refused to marry a white couple. Gays would like for their cause to be seen on equal grounds. My beliefs as a Christian would be in peril if I was no longer allowed to practice and voice them.

    By redefining marriage to include same-sex couples this undermines the sanctity of my own marriage. It is an insult to the very idea of family. It is equivalent to redefining the word “dog” to include “cat.” It just doesn’t work. Who gets to decide the definition of “marriage”? God. As we have already seen, He made His opinion very clear in the opening chapters of His book.

    Were you to fight against my right to wear underwear it would not even come close to my fight against defining same-sex partners as a “marriage.” My underwear is normal, a t-shirt and briefs. It isn’t seen in public, it doesn’t have any influence on anyone else’s life. It isn’t offensive to anyone. It isn’t considered immoral by even the most extreme groups. It doesn’t deprive children of the right to a mother and father. It doesn’t confuse the important role that gender plays in society. It doesn’t fly in the face of natural reproductive processes, something that belongs to realm of holy matrimony. Same-sex marriage (again, an oxymoron) can’t claim those things.

  6. Megan says:


    That was an excellent explanation, I agree on all of your points. It would be ignorant to believe that if ‘same-sex marriage’ was passed that it would not effect me, my religion, or my family. I Support Proposition 8!


  7. prop8discussion says:

    Marriage is our culture’s ultimate expression of equality–it takes one man and one woman to create a family. Even if a marriage can’t have children or choose not to have children the definition of their relationship expresses this equality. I think it’s okay for this to have a separate name.

    One could see a lesbian union as a marginalization of men, or a homosexual union as a marginalization of women.

    Equality is especially important when it comes to raising children. Children deserve/need a father and a mother. Neither parent should be marginalized.

    Yes, many children are already growing up in single-parent homes. Prop 8 should be a reminder to everyone that as a society we need to assist and strengthen families as much as possible. Really, as a society we should be most concerned with the success and health of our families.


  8. […] I Support Proposition 8 Lehi’s Library – October 16, 2008 […]

  9. Kirana says:

    I wish you all the best on Proposition 8 and hope that your society chooses to safeguard its own future stability.

  10. We shouldnt’ even have to be having a discussion about Prop. 8. The courts overstepped their authority. We ought to let our voices be heard in condemning their tyranny.


  11. leyla says:

    May I ask how or why someone like you would take the parts of the Bible that you like and disregard the other parts? You know, the part about stoning girls who cease to be virgins, or the part about how someone who works on the seventh day should be killed, or about how a child who “talks back” to a father ought to be killed? Or about the right of a slave master to kill a slave?
    why is it that you are not actively undergoing political organization to achieve these things? is it that you admit that everything in the bible shouldn’t be considered official doctrine of the best way to live in 2008? It’s funny, this picking and choosing of sections of the bible. You seem to like the parts of the bible that are homophobic, but you don’t believe that girls ought to be stoned to death for ceasing to be virgins. I don’t fucking get it.

    Do you have a rational explanation?!

  12. James says:

    I have three things to say about your comments:

    1) One of the foundational aspects of Christianity is that the Law of Moses (ancient Jewish religion) is no longer authoritative. Therefore, as a Christian, I am not bound to any of the practices you mentioned.

    2) As a Mormon, I do not believe in the inerrancy of the bible anyway. My opposition to gay marriage is not necessarily based on the bible. I oppose it for other reasons.

    3) You showed the true class of San Francisco liberal (I saw your blog) by dropping the F word on a religious oriented website.


  13. leyla says:

    Thanks for the response. It is informative.

    Regarding my use of a certain word:

    Well, I hope that you will one day be as concerned with the reality of countless innocent civilians dying for a nation’s desire to have 4-car garages and gas-guzzling SUVs as you are with a word.

    One shouldn’t wonder why most free thinking people perceive of organized religion as a joke.

    How about Darfur? Ever wonder why churches in the U.S. aren’t taking a stance there?

    It’s ridiculous if you think about it.

    You’re upset about a word?!?

    What, in life, is the real obscenity?!

    Gimme a break!!

  14. James says:

    I don’t see how ANY of the issues you raised have absolutely anything to do with proposition 8 or your insensitivity to the tone of a religious website.

  15. leyla says:

    I am bringing up the issue of hypocrisy among people who claim to be religious.

    At the risk of stating the obvious, I am not the first person to argue that most Americans who claim to be religious are in actuality something quite different.

    An authentically religious or spiritual person ought to be concerned about certain tragedies that are occuring in the world at this time.

    You are concerned about a word? Great. Got it.

  16. James says:

    You are certainly welcome to bring up any issue you want (I’m a pretty tolerant moderator of my blog) but I really don’t understand how the issues you brought up pertain specifically to my backing of proposition 8.

    Are some religious people hypocrits? Sure! Of course. I even know some. But are they all? My opinion is that most are not. Most religious people in America are good people, they love God and they love their neighbor.

    I think the point you are trying to make is that you think it is hypocritical to make such a big deal about same-sex marriage but then to not care so much about other issues (like Darfur).

    However, I’m not sure that we could even begin to establish that there is any reality in that allegation. For instance, every morning when I am flipping channels as I get ready to leave I pass by a Christian television show that is constantly pleading for donations so they can improve the lives of the poor in certain African areas.

    I happen to belong to a Church that provides an almost immeasurable amount of help to the poor and needy. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is known worldwide for its humanitarian efforts. See here:

    Anyway, I can appreciate your frustration. We would like to be able to help everyone everywhere. Unfortunately, it isn’t possible just yet.

    I hope that our disagreement about proposition 8 doesn’t blind us to the wonderful things that the other side is doing for the world.

  17. leyla says:

    Are you speaking of missionary-type organizations? Organizations that do things such as drop burlap bags of rice printed with scripture? I find that culturally offensive.

    Anyway – the allegation that I made can, in fact, be proven: Large numbers of people who self-identify as religious or conservative tend to vote for the Republican party. This party, in the past eight years, has brought you a war built on now admitted lies (i.e. Colin Powell at the United Nations) with devastating human costs both in Afghanistan and in Iraq. It is true that FOX News may not report about the human cost to you. Notice that the failure of FOX news does not absolve the American public of the moral responsibility to investigate and explore the truth of this human cost. One needn’t watch something like Al Jezeera. The BBC alone, for instance, would inform many.

    What we have done is to prioritize our national desire for power, wealth, and oil over human life. May I ask why self-described religious people have supported this?

    I’ll provide my own answer: because they are not actually religious or spiritual, but instead, rampant materialists.

  18. leyla says:


    Ever wonder what the top-censored story of recent times has been?

    Pretty tragic. But still, in this age of information, we regular people are ultimately morally responsible for educating ourselves–of putting down People magazine and actually devouring the news before we do something like vote.

  19. James says:

    You may have not noticed, but this website is about Mormon Theology and scripture. There isn’t alot of room for political debate. Nonetheless, I don’t mind a friendly exchange.

    Christian churches are one of the greatest sources of charity work around the world. Every year huge sums of money, and countless hours of volunteer work go towards helping the poor both at home and abroad. If they don’t like the help we give them (allegedly because they don’t want a sack of food with a scripture on it) they are welcome to turn their backs on our help. Beggars can’t be choosers.

    Speaking of which, do you have any evidence that such a practice is even common? Have you every been to a poor country to provide aid? I have. I lived for two years in some very poor areas of Brazil helping people everyday. I offer the following article as an example of the kinds of things we are doing:

    You liberals are funny sometimes. You have made Fox News (and of course President Bush) the target of your hate and rage. Fox News may have a slight bias, but it can’t be sanely maintained that Fox outweighs the liberal bias of every single other news organization. You can’t blame Fox news for your problems, that is too easy.

    As for religious people in America, you are welcome to hold any opinion of them that you want. I could care less what you think about us. We generally vote Republican because of domestic social issues, not because of foreign policy issues. We favor traditional marriage, we oppose abortion, and we want the government out of our lives as much as possible. We don’t believe that the government is the answer to our problems. We are upset that Pres. Bush has expanded the government so much, we don’t like how much spending has gone on. But in our opinion, Obama will be worse.

    You have no evidence that religous Americans prioritize power, wealth, or oil over human life. Instead, we belive in the diginity of mankind. We believe in charity. We believe in hard work. We believe in helping those who try to help themselves. We don’t believe that the government has any place to tell us how or in what manner we should go about providing humaniarian aid. We can do it just fine by ourselves.
    In fact, it is the exact opposite. Liberals like yourself favor the convenience of abortion over the preservation of life. It is the liberals of this country who denigrate life both before and after death. They are responsible for the deaths of countless unborn human beings, and for the depreciation of countless poor people. They tell the poor in this country that they can’t do things for themselves, and brainwash them to believe that the government is the answer to their problems. The democrats have built up their power in precisely this manner. They play class warfare games. Giving a man a fish doesn’t solve the real problem, you have to help him understand that he can catch fish for himself.

    And what is with the fixation on oil? Is it evil to drill for and use oil? These oil companies provide an enormously important service to our nation. All this humanitarian aid would be impossible to accomplish without oil. The computer you are using wouldn’t exist without oil. We need oil, and we have plenty of it. You should be thanking those who do the hard work and invest billions of dollars into retrieving this precious resource. Don’t hate them because they are successful.

    If you want to continue believing that religious Americans are “rampant materialists” go right ahead. I don’t care. I don’t expect you to change your mind, especially considering the city you are surrounded by. We see the world through different eyes, we have very different worldviews. I trust that you are sincere in your philosophy for helping others, even if I think your philosophy is inferior to mine.

    In short, I think that capitolism is the surest way to provide humanitarian aid most efficiently.

  20. jesurgislac says:

    We favor traditional marriage, we oppose abortion, and we want the government out of our lives as much as possible.

    Actually, Christian right-wingers may favor “traditional marriage” – women as property, transferred from father to husband with no say and no rights – but that “traditional marriage” has long ago been revised out of existence in the law.

    Christian right-wingers in fact rather tend to support abortion than otherwise – they absolutely support policies that lead to a high abortion rate, and oppose policies that are known to reduce abortion rates.

    Christian right-wingers have just supported a policy to get the government into people’s lives: against same-sex marriage.

  21. James says:

    Conservatives do want the government out of our lives as much as possible. Sometimes, it isn’t possible. We obviously need the government to step in sometimes.

    In the case of Prop 8, it wasn’t so much the government but the voice of the people. In fact, the government overturned a decision made by the voice of the people last May, and so last week the people of California took the opportunity to tell the government to get out of the way and let the people of the state of California decide the issue. We can only hope that California courts have the decency to do their job this time around.

    Conservatives believe in the decency of human life, and we support equal rights for all good citizens. It is simply a silly thing to suggest that Christian conservatives would ever favor the type of warped “traditional” marriage that you have described. It is a false caricature you have of Christian values.

    As for abortion, Conservatives do not support policies that lead to high abortion rates. In fact, we support policies that lead to extremely low abortion rates. What is that policy? Keep your trousers on until you are responsible enough to raise a child.

    This blog is about Mormon issues. Sometimes, rarely, that crosses over into politics. This comment section is closed because it has left the realm of this blog.

Comments are closed.