Families Created Equal, or Political Activism in Religion

In May, the California Supreme Court overturned a ban on same-sex marriage, legalized marriage began June 17th.  At the same time, a proposition qualified for the November ballot, which would  amend to the California Constitution so that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.  A "yes" vote amends the constitution; a "no" vote leaves same-sex marriage legal.   Jerry Brown, California's Attorney General, wrote the title  of the proposition as "Eliminates Right of Same Sex Couples to Marry."  The "Yes on Prop. 8" coalition contested the title in court, and lost.

Today I learn from Jim Burroway that San Francisco Latter Day Saint (LDS, Mormon) church members in will hear a message from the LDS leadership, asking church members to participate in "three walk/phone days to help generate voter support on August 16, 23 and September 6" to work to pass Prop 8.

Shouldn't the involvement of the church in political affairs threaten their tax-exempt status?

I've marked my calendar.  I fully support marriage equality in California.

Learn more about the arguments at KQED's You Decide page

Comments

[Karoli]

You'd think so, right? But in fact, churches do not put their tax-exempt status at risk for speaking on issues, provided that they do not endorse or otherwise support candidates.

I discovered this during my fit of anger over the anti-gay petition in church last October. Churches have the right to publicly support or oppose any issue-based initiative.

[Liz Ditz]

This from a LA Times editorial writer, saying more about the meeting the editorial board had with the "yes on 8" coalition members:

Behind the gay-marriage talk

At one point, the conversation turned to the "activist judges" whose May ruling opened the door to same-sex marriage, and how similar this case was to the 1948 case that declared bans on interracial marriage unconstitutional. According to one of the Prop. 8 reps, that 1948 ruling was OK because people are born to their race and thus are in need of constitutional protection, while gays and lesbians choose their homosexuality. So much for the expert opinions of the American Psychological Assn. and the American Academy of Pediatrics that people cannot choose their sexuality. Oh, those activist doctor types.

In any case, one Prop. 8 supporter said, gay rights are not as important as children's rights, and it's obvious that same-sex couples who married would "recruit" their children toward homosexuality because otherwise, unable to procreate themselves, they would have no way to replenish their numbers. Even editorial writers can be left momentarily speechless, and this was one of those moments. Aside from this notion of a homosexual recruitment plot -- making it understandable where the word "homophobia" came from -- this made no logical sense at all. Same-sex couples. whether married or not, already have children. Marriage wouldn't change a thing about this picture except, perhaps, to model for children that parents tend to be married.

More at Box Turtle Bulletin.

[Chino Blanco]

LDS 'Yes on 8' Game Plan

I've posted a letter sent from Boyd K. Packer on July 28th to the California LDS stake presidents:

BKP July 28

Apparently, there is a plan in place to put up one million 'Yes on 8' yard signs at 7:00 am on September 22nd.