A Mormon in the Aftermath of Prop 8

A Mormon in the Aftermath of Prop 8

Friday, November 14, 2008

filed under: family

Guest blogger Vanessa: There are two sides to every story. Here's mine.

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, known to most as the Mormon church. Two months ago, I had no idea what Proposition 8 was or how much it would affect me.

Deciding to support it was one of the greatest emotional conflicts I have ever been through in my entire life. I dearly love all of my gay friends. They are some of the most wonderful people I have ever met and I want them to be happy. I fully support domestic partnerships because I know that everyone wants to be with the one they love.

Yet there was an unsettled feeling in the pit in my stomach -- the definition of marriage. I am religious and believe the Biblical definition as being between a man and woman, going all the way back to Adam and Eve. Marriage is the crucial partnership that makes it possible to biologically have children together and seal a family unit.

But what would people think? Would they understand?

I wasn't alone in my confusion. Many of my church friends where going through the same turmoil. Firm in their beliefs, but not wanting to alienate their gay friends and coworkers.

After a month of praying about the issue, I came to a personal realization. What is this really about? The definition of marriage. Man and woman. I decided that I would follow my faith, although a large part of me was left sorrowful.

I didn't donate money to Yes on Prop 8, but like many others, I donated my time. I held "Yes on Prop 8" signs and went polling. I was flipped off, called horrible names and was the target of much yelling. It's okay, though, I understand. They have the right to yell, and I listened to what they had to say.

Could they understand? Could they know how much I still cared for them?

Election Day came. I was proud to see all of the "I Voted" stickers on everyone in my city and I celebrated what I thought would be a new era ... where we would come together to work through the issues facing our nation.

The next morning, Prop 8 passed. I was honestly surprised. I don't watch much TV, and all of the ads I had heard on the radio were against the proposition. Officials such as Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Diane Feinstein (who I have complete respect for) had both opposed it.

Although I was glad that the hours of time invested had paid off, I was far from happy. My heart broke for all of the couples that woke up that morning, not knowing if they were married or not. I cried at my desk when I was alone. I couldn't imagine what they were going through and I prayed that they might be comforted.

That's when I noticed a change. People who opposed Prop 8 were angry. A completely natural reaction of course, but this was different. This was a kind of anger that I had never been exposed to. The anger seemed filled with hate and distrust ... and the search was on to find a reason Prop 8 passed. And someone to blame.

Then the protests started. I couldn't believe it at first. The blaming finger had pointed at the Mormon church, a religion that makes up under two percent of the California population (and later I found out that we made up LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT of the yes vote). Yes, a large portion of Yes on Prop 8's donations came from members of our church. But didn't they have the right to donate to a cause that they believed in?

And it wasn't just blame, it was accusations of hate and prejudice ... everything that I have stood against my entire life.

The protesters were at the Los Angeles Temple ... MY temple. My place of worship. Somewhere that I had always felt safe. I had so many emotions inside of me that I couldn't differentiate one from the other. Would they desecrate my place of worship? Would my family and friends be safe from harm?

I had to know for myself and headed down to the temple as soon as I got off work.

The sea of protesters were marching peacefully but were carrying cruel and offensive anti-Mormon signs. My heart sank and I left determined to prove their accusations wrong.

I wanted to make sure that my church friends understood the other side of the story and felt compassion for all those who were hurting.

I discovered that they already did understand. They were going through the same thing I was. Not all of them had even voted yes on the issue. But no matter how they voted, their hearts were still open to those who were standing against them.

Over the next few days, things were rough for both sides. The protesters continued, although I helplessly felt there was nothing I could do for them. Our gates were written on, they banged on the doors of our chapel and stood outside our parking lot to take photos of our license plates. The members who had donated money to Yes on Prop 8 were exposed online, open for attack.

Blog posts and emails from church members started to pop up everywhere -- messages of love and peace and encouragement. Every prayer at church that Sunday spoke for the safety of our members and that those who where yelling outside our gates would be comforted and feel our love for them.

This was not an issue of hate. For me, it was purely an issue of religious belief. We have all made sacrifices. Many have lost friends, and others abandoned by their coworkers. I, myself, had to find another place to live.

I believe that God loves all of us, and it is our duty to love one another as his children ... through all of the trials and tribulations that we face together.

164 comments so far | Post a comment now >>

Here is the reason that for me, religious arguments in regards to same sex marriage fail: We are a nation of SECULAR laws. Our laws may be BASED in Judeo-Christian values but they are NOT Judeo-Christian LAWS. Thus each state’s marriage laws are SECULAR. Religious arguments that “marriage” is ONLY between a man and woman and never between those of the same gender are absolutely irrelevant. We are talking here about 2 consenting adults (hopefully sober and sane at the time) choosing to commit their lives to each other under the SECULAR laws of a state. Now if a particular religion or faith chooses not to conduct a ceremony, well that is an entirely different issue. So is a situation that essentially involves very young children getting married to adults. Society has a very compelling interest in preventing THIS kind of “marriage”. Even today 2 adults will find it difficult (impossible?) to marry in a Catholic Church if neither member of the couple is Catholic.(And even then that might be a problem) Those values (mentioned above) are found pretty much EVERYWHERE. EVERY society has rules about theft, homicide, and such. Even societies that are not part of the Abrahamic religions. Therefore those values are HUMAN values not owned by a particular religion, which in all likelihood incorporated pre-existing values into the religion rather than the other way around. In sum, again, religious arguments have no place in a discussion about secular laws. I think that THIS point will be much more successful than calling those who make religious based arguments, bigots as it completely removes the legitimacy/applicability of the argument itself.

- My thoughts

Posted 11/13/08 04:49 PM

In 1948, 90% of Americans disagreed with the California Supreme Court when they struck down California’s ban on interracial marriage (Perez v Sharp). By Jennifer’s logic, those voters should have simply exercised the amendment process and democratically voted to rescind it, and make it democratically illegal to marry someone with a different skin color. Fortunately, back then, people actually believed in the constitution and respected the CA Supreme Court’s wisdom and didn’t try to bully a majority-rules amendment to take that right away.

- Joel

Posted 11/13/08 04:51 PM

“It was the black community that voted overwhelmingly (70%) YES on Prop 8 and that 70% put the yes votes over the top and because of that Prop8 passed. So why aren’t people protesting black churches? - Misdirected???” I dunno maybe because the black community didn’t donate over 20 million dollars from out of state members? Organized websites, phone banks and a ton of other stuff that would affect one state. Where was the involvement in the other states? This was a direct attack by the Mormom church against a select group of the community in a selected state.

- 4civilrights

Posted 11/13/08 04:53 PM

Interesting how many “Mean Girls” turn into “Mean Adults” as evidenced by several postings on this site.

- czar2004

Posted 11/13/08 04:54 PM

You seem like a kind, intelligent and thoughtful person though I do have two questions: 1) Knowing what you know now, would you still vote the way you did?; AND 2) Have you apologized to *any* of your gay friends for voting the way you did? Now, people are angry with the Mormons because the LDS church spent millions and millions of dollars to get folks to vote “Yes” on Prop 8. As well, folks are also kinda cranky at what they perceive to be hypocrisy: That is, Mormons have allowed polygamy (incidentally, only the type of polygamy wherein one man gets to have many wives (not the kind where one woman can acquire more than one husband)). The Mormons undermined one-man/one-woman long before gay people came to public attention. Finally, those of us raised in mainstream Protestant denominations see your church as a cult. Your religion is one that is in the minority and - one would have hoped, in the last instance - could have spoken up for other minorities as well.

- Rob

Posted 11/13/08 04:55 PM

Interesting “Mormons have the courage to stand up for thier beleifs even when it isn’t the most popular thing to do.” It wasn’t that long ago that Mormons were chased out of NY, Missouri and Illinois, because they didn’t agree with the majority. Must be interesting to go from being the oppressed to being the oppressor.

- czar2004

Posted 11/13/08 04:59 PM

This issue of marriage has dug up prejudices and bias ideas from everyone. People think that gay marriage will destroy the sanctity of marriage…. Woman are portrayed in the media as objects. Men are raised in this day and age to be “players” “bad boys” “pimps” etc. It has been made socially acceptable and COOL and REWARDED to have multiple partners, to cheat, to use members of the opposite sex. Divorce is TOTALY accepted and normal. Look at the stats on divorce. You hear about people getting married for money, green cards, power…etc. You have celebs getting quicky marriages and even quicker divorces. Marriage is NOT what it was 50 years ago. And this isnt because of gay people. Marriage is ALREADY ruined. And its bc ALL of us. Gay, straigh, bi, transgender…All of us. Marriage use to be sacred. It use to mean that two people decided they found their life partner through thick and thin. The love of their life. And joined their lives till death do they part. Marriage USE to be respected. Marriages use to last. But now, and NOT because of homosexuals, marriage really means nothing. If you got divorced 50 years ago, it was a big deal. So looked down upon. How could anyone get a, gasp…”DIVORC!” People throw divorce parties the way they throw batchelorette parties! It has been deemed socially cool to be uncommited and have multiple dating partners. Marriage has gone from a state of being willfully commited to your partner to being a prison sentence to some people. Society has dirtied marriage, not gays. You could easily exchange the word GAY with the word BLACK for all the things people say against it. Remember when Blacks couldnt marry whites? People said it would ruin the sanctity of marriage. Its hateful discrimination. We are all human beings. Its not like gays are aliens from another plant who want to take over like the Tale of the Body Snatchers. They want to get married to their partners because they love them. And they havent been allowed in society to fairly express their love. And thats not fair. Its discrimination and and its hateful. ONLY God can judge us. AND NONE OF US ARE GOD! SO STOP JUDGING THE GAYS! Leave them alone. Let them express their love. The Gays cant ruin the sanctity of marriage. Its already ruined. Banning Gay marriage is

- hannah

Posted 11/13/08 05:01 PM

I appreciated reading this story about someone who was torn being what they are taught by their religion vs. their personal anguish about hurting people. That’s the problem with many religious groups today. It’s time for change. They need to stop using religious scripture to sanctify bigotry by continuining to demonize homosexuals in order to justify discriminating against them and not allowing them equal treatment under the law. And as for marriage, it was more than just its sacredness or saving traditional marriage involved here. It was not allowing “those people” to have it called the same thing the majority calls it in order not to sully it with their deviance. It was pure religious-based prejudice working against homosexuals and they realize that, and were shocked and angered. For better or worse, they now want to show they have had enough of it. What the majority forgets is marriage has always changed. In the time of their parents (and grandparents) traditional marriages meant not being allowed to divorce, or sully it by marrying someone outside your race or religion. But after laws were passed changing these, the concept of what constituted traditional marriage changed. However for older generations, it’s hard to accept change. Sometimes it has to be forced on them by law, because unlike religion, the law eventually treats all people equally. According to exit polls, the majority of young people under 30 voted against Prop 8 because many don’t care who marries who as long as they love each other and want to start a family together. They see denial of equality under the law as unjust. Future generations, who won’t think twice about homosexuals marrying (like their parents don’t think twice about interracial couples marrying) will look back at this time and wonder like their parents, what was all the fuss about?

- VT Moreno

Posted 11/13/08 05:05 PM

Trisha, Mrs R and others. there seems to be a misunderstanding concerning separation of Church and State. It is nowhere to be found in our constitution as something that prohibits the body of a church from involving themselves in social issues. the first amendment says that a wall of separation is to be established between the two; in context, it primarily means that the state cannot regulate religious activities at will unless it has to, there is some debate here. Also, that there cannot be an established national religion, by congress etc. So, Concerning The separation of church and state, it really isn’t applicable here, it’s become a borrowed doctrine in attempts to tear down churches by opportunists. One more thing, for those that are and have been asking for the LDS church to lose their tax exempt status; it’s a 501 (c)(3) in the Internal Revenue Code, read it and ask if any of the actions the LDS church have taken apply. What small amounts of money opponents have tried to designate as a contribution to the Prop 8 campaign by the church (lodging for church authorities while traveling, they are always traveling) is no where near the amount (100’s of thousands) that other 501 (c_)’s gave to the no on 8 campaign. The GLBT non profits gave a staggering amount, they would be pointing the finger at themselves if the church’s tax exempt status is challenged. Again, church members provided the funds and time. The church itself did not. -art

- art

Posted 11/13/08 05:06 PM

Unbelievable. Has anyone noticed the high degree of passive/aggressiveness that’s taught in Mormon families. In all my years, I’ve never seen it taken to this degree. Whether you like it or not, Vanessa, you are no friend to the gay community, due to your refusal to understand the concept of separation of church and state. Imposing your religious beliefs on others is HEINOUS.

- Bruno

Posted 11/13/08 05:06 PM

How can you “care” for gay people so much and harm us so badly? How can you support that ban with your actions and pretend that there are no consequences to us? How could you not understand?

- Jang

Posted 11/13/08 05:13 PM

To the author: No I don’t think you felt hate. But love and hate are not just feelings, they are actions. When you decided that your personal religious beliefs outweighed the constitutionally protected fundamental rights of a minority community, you demonstrated disregard and contempt. Your emotions may have said “love” but your behavior said “hate”. Now I’m sure you pray for us. And really really wish that your evil vile behavior didn’t hurt us - mostly so you won’t have to feel guilty. But it does hurt us. And your behavior - your church’s planning, funding, and implementing a campaign of lies - was evil. So you’ll just have to understand that gay folks are not so forgiving. We have little sympathy for some yelling at your gate. And that we reject your “feeling” our pain. You caused it. It doesn’t make you any better that you “feel bad” now. And telling me you love me doesn’t atone for your evil actions. Being all pain-feely doesn’t make you holy. So if it causes you guilt or pain to be confronted with the evil of your actions… well all I can say is that I love you and feel your pain. See how good I am?

- Timothy

Posted 11/13/08 05:14 PM

YES on 8 is not about discrimination it is about Marriage and what it means. It is disgusting to me that the NO on 8 side are all about equal rights and tolerance for difference in opinion and yet have no respect for the opinion of those who differ from them. CA law does not take away any right from those who are in a domestic partnership or gay union (Section 297.5 of the California Family Code)so that is not the issue here. I think it is a cowardly thing to target the Mormon church as Activists have done and continue to do. The Mormons did not pass Prop 8 Californian Voters did. This whole protest of prop 8 by the NO on 8 group is an insult on the will of the people of California and I am surprised that such a thing should be allowed to take place in the United States. The LDS temple was forced to close on the Thursday following the passing of prop 8, members are not sure of safety in going to church, supporters of prop 8 are having their businesses boycotted all because a group of people have no tolerance for beliefs different from theirs, beliefs, they, as US citizens have a right to. When did the USA come to this??

- Anonymous

Posted 11/13/08 05:14 PM

Blah, blah, blah. If it isn’t about race, it’s about gender preferences. COME ON people. How does it go? BE the change you want to see in the world. Stop forcing what you believe to be true and right on everyone else. Just because someone decided something was right or wrong, and then convinced a few others, and then others more, does NOT make something right. And just because something has been done a certain way for as long as we can remember doesn’t make it right either. What matters is how we treat each other. Life is one giant paradox. Both sides of a moral value or belief can have very valid arguments supporting said belief or value. In the END, we will all find out what is true and right. I believe what I believe, mainly through my own life experiences. If we all believed one thing, where would the balance be? Life would be pretty boring. I would put what I believe here, but then half of you would ignore anything I had to say. The point is, stop beating people up or threatening them because they don’t agree with what you believe. That is just plain stupid. Not only that, it invalidates anything good you might have to say. I may or may not agree with what this author has to say or how she voted, but what stands out to me is how awful it is that she had to MOVE because she stood up for what she believed—in THIS COUNTRY. More power to you girl! At least she did what she thought was right, and did it without threatening someone or violating their property or person.

- Ginny

Posted 11/13/08 05:14 PM

Vanessa: What boggles my mind is how you couldn’t see this coming. I am not in any way a hateful person, yet I hate you right now. How could you be so blind? How about you ask yourself the question “would the disappointment and hatred and sadness be the same for you had Prop. 8 failed?” I think from your words here the answer would undoubtedly be NO! You inflicted great pain on others, myself included, for no realy personal gain. Had Prop. 8 failed, you would have gone on with your life just as you had before. Your church could continue to exclude gay couples from marriage just like before, and no one would have asked anything more of it. Your CHURCH’S definition of marriage would remain unchanged. Instead, YOU had to change the definition of marriage for people who don’t belong to your church or ascribe to your beliefs. Now they are angry at both you and your church, and rightly so. Now, hopefully the California Supreme Court will step in and clean up your mess. But, if it doesn’t, you should consider the hurt you have caused and the lack of any gain to yourself should this come up for another vote in two years and do what should have been the OBVIOUS right thing: vote for freedom and individual liberty and for people do decide for themselves what marriage means to them, just like you have.

- John K.

Posted 11/13/08 05:19 PM

Vanessa: I am LDS, and also have a number of homosexual friends. Thank you for expressing your feelings and experience so eloquently, I have had much the same emotional journey. When the first presidency of the church first expressed their support for prop. 8 I was dumbfounded. The church is almost always carefully politically neutral. I had the same thoughts that many others are voicing, “Why shouldn’t the gay/lesbian community be granted the same LEGAL rights as straight couples?”. In fact, my faith was shaken. The problem is that marriage is an institution with one foot firmly planted in religious doctrine and the other entrenched in civil/legal doctrine. Civil unions are an attempt to separate the civil/legal aspect from the religious one, have been declared (in California) to convey ALL of the same rights as marriage. If you don’t believe me, check the legal code. So, the fight wasn’t about the right to be with loved ones, or make medical decisions, or even handle inheritance. The fight was about the definition of the word marriage. Maybe all the fears that redefining the word marriage was merely the first step to trapping churches in a mess of legal obligations and lawsuits was misplaced. As the tone of the protests becomes more hateful and strident, I’m more inclined to believe that they’re less concerned about tolerance and more concerned with forcing open-armed acceptance of their lifestyle (backed with legal consequences) on the rest of the world. I understand a certain amount of disappointment, but the hatred is unexpected. The mormons didn’t attack anyone, we voted on a constitional ammendment that would have redefined marriage in a way antithetical to our beliefs. Notice the word VOTED, in a democratic election, with millions of other people. Voting one’s conscience, in America, should not be a crime. I see from previous comments that your love and concern is of not matter to your new enemies, and your olive branch has been slapped down and stepped on. Fair enough. And as far as the outpouring of hate and threats go, I’m finding it hard to maintain any sympathy for the gay and lesbian community. The entire state voted against their definition of marriage, while still extending them all of civil and legal benefits they deserve. The homosexual community is welcome to march around and wave signs if it makes them feel good. While I believe the

- Mike

Posted 11/13/08 05:21 PM

Joel - You said “…if Mormans were the ones who funded robo-call…” If? Did they alone funded those calls. Did Obama or his people ever speak out against those robo-calls & ask that they stop? If so, I didn’t hear about it. I did, however, hear him say many times that he is against gay marriage but supports civil unions. —- Many people didn’t support this bills because they fear that their kids will be taught about gay lifestyles in school. This is ridiculous because you can’t even teach basic health/sex ed without parental permission. So with a little research voters could have quelled that fear. Another fear that has been expressed is that churches would be forced to preform marriages for gay people even if their religion doesn’t support gay marriage. This seems to be gray area and most likely the reason why many religions wanted the bill to pass. Maybe the next bill should include verbiage that clarifies a churches right to conduct marriages based on their religious beliefs. Personally, I support the rights of gay people to be allowed to marry and call it a marriage and have all the rights that a marriage has now, but, I also support the rights of religions to not preform a gay marriage if they so choose. Although I’m sure that no person, gay or straight, would want to get married in a church/religious establishment that doesn’t support their beliefs.

- Misguided???

Posted 11/13/08 05:27 PM

Mike, please do a little more research. CA does not have Civil Unions that grant ALL of the rights of marriage. CA does have Domestic Partnerships and although they grant a lot of the same rights as marriage (within the state of CA), they do not grant ALL of the same rights. Furthermore, the majority of those “rights” are enforcable by State Institutions ONLY. For 1 example, a company (nongovernment) can give insurance benefits to spouses of “married” couples and at the same time exclude souses of “domestic partners”. It is NOT equal.

- czar2004

Posted 11/13/08 05:29 PM

Mike: Don’t be surprised when your new-found Catholic and other Christian friends vote to deny YOUR church some kind of right in the future. You deserve it, and if Prop. 8 is allowed to stand by the Cali Supreme Court, I’ll be the first to vote against the Mormons, just to teach you a lesson. Democracy does not mean voting on minority rights. But, if your church wants to change the meaning of democracy, may it come back to bite you hard.

- John K.

Posted 11/13/08 05:34 PM

Unfortunately you (like so many other Latter-day Saints) have failed to understand that this issue had absolutely nothing to do with one’s religious liberties and everything to do with a disparate minority’s CIVIL rights. This had nothing to do with redefining the definition of a RELIGIOUS marriage, only allowing for the equal protection BY LAW that LEGAL marriage endows its parties. Latter-day Saints have ALWAYS had a different “definition of marriage” compared to the law, yet that has never stopped the church from practicing and believing in the superiority of OUR definition. Technically speaking, the only “truly valid” marriage is a celestial marriage, for time and eternity, solemnized by a sealing in the temple by someone with priesthood authority correct? And subsequently the only valid “family” (in the sense of the ideal eternal family) is a family that is sealed to each other by priesthood power. We believe that God INTENDED men to be with women VIA SEALINGS, we also believe that God INTENDED brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, grandparents, etc to mean a familial relationship EXTENDING BEYOND DEATH, yet we’re gracious enough to extend these “definitions” to non-Mormon families. You say that marriage has a specific definition, by God, first recognized by the marriage between Adam and Eve. But what you haven’t told your readers is that you and every Mormon believes that this “marriage” was a MORMON SEALING. We believe that THIS KIND of marriage is the truly superior marriage, the only one capable of enduring past the veil, yet why is it we don’t see any Mormons insisting that civil marriages between heterosexuals (or religious marriages performed by other religious institutions) be “second-class”? Why isn’t the First Presidency directing all its members to preserve the sanctity of the priesthood’s sealing power by restricting the definition (and subsequent rights) to only an LDS temple marriage? I’m sorry, but the church’s support for the CAMPAIGN on prop 8 was absolutely disgusting and was enough for me to completely question my testimony. How could the church jump in bed with groups that are KNOWN TO LIE, groups that LIE ABOUT US EVEN!? Does the first presidency, while insisting that they support domestic partnerships and adoption rights, not realize that aligning themselves with groups whose agenda include SLOWLY STRIPPING LGBT PEOPLE OF SUCH RIGHTS make it seem as if either the First Presidence is completely daft, or COMPLETE LIARS???

- A TRULY gay-friendly Mormon

Posted 11/13/08 05:48 PM