8: The Mormon Propositon

Cafe Society
21

As emphasized by examples here, not all Mormons supported Prop 8, but it was and is the LDS Church’s official position. A letter from the Prophet was read to congregations all over the US instructing the faithful to support the Proposition with their time and money. Other than my wife, I did not know a single dissenter. I supported the idea at the time as the inerrant word of God (although I did not commit any time or money to it), until my wife persuaded me that God was wrong. I later left the LDS Church, as did my wife shortly after.

Sorry, I can’t comment on the movie yet. I just bumped it to the top of my Netflix queue.

22

Puddlegum, as I understand it the anger here toward the Mormons is not so much because they voted as the fact that they funded the propoganda campaign supporting Prop 8. And by “they” I mean both the Church itself and its members.

23

Dusty, if that is true then the hate is still misguided. The propaganda campaign did not pass Prop 8, the voters did.

24

I have a hard time believing that without the campaign from the LDS church, prop 8 would have passed. Anyone who would support such a hateful piece of legislation doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt.

25

Heh heh heh. Someone is a Mormon trying to assuage their hearts by continuing a campaign of misleading statistics, right?

You haven’t seen the movie, right?

What percentage of the Prop 8 funding came from Mormons? What percentage came from out of state?

You are really prepared to go to the mat with the position that if Mormons did not participate in the campaign, then it would have passed anyway?

You really think that type of poor statistical rhetoric flies on SDMB?

26

Benefit of the doubt about what? Something that basically amounts to a conspiracy theory? I’m with **Sampiro **on this. Bash the Mormons all you want for the position they take, and even for funding the pro-8 campaign, but in the end it was the CA voters that made it happen. At least I can say I’m one voter who voted no on 8.

You have to remember that CA has a lot of conservative counties, and a large Hispanic population that may largely vote Democrat, but can be socially conservative on issues like SSM. We’re not the bastion of liberalism that much of the country seems to think we are.

27

When the LDS Prophet in Utah writes a letter to be read in church by all Mormon bishops in the US, stating that God wants me, a Texas Mormon (at the time), to send money to California in order to persuade people vote to suppress the rights of a minority in California, the LDS Church is gonna take some criticism. Hatred may be misdirected, but anger and sharp criticism are entirely appropriate.

28

Here is the letter. The press release erroneously implies that the letter was sent only to LDS leaders in California. As I stated earlier, it was read in front of the whole congregation in a Texas ward. I know for a fact that it was read in front of several congregations in Utah. I suspect (sorry, I don’t have a cite) that the letter was sent to the bishopric of every LDS ward in the US and read in the majority of LDS congregations.

29

Agreed. How does an institution like that take an overt political stance and yet keep their tax-exempt status? I don’t get it.

I think you and John Mace give voters too much credit. While you and I and a select other few will take the time to research the issues and vote accordingly, most Americans are very susceptible to media and propoganda. Money talks and the LDS church used their money to spread lies and misinformation throughout the state of California to ensure that your average ignorant voter was able to equate SSM with the downfall of the family structure, removal of freedom of religion and suppression of free speech. (I still don’t get how those last two even remotely relate, but that’s what the signs and commercials said.)

Did they force voters at gunpoint? No. Did they mislead voters and lie to them in order to incite fear? Yes.

30

That’s a main point the film in question raises.

31

Wow. Good on you for getting out of that mess and thank you for sharing.

32

I am not a Mormon and have no truck with those evil cultists, but am only trying to point out misplaced hatred. The voters of California passed prop 8 and would have done so if no Mormons had participated. The anti- prop 8 folks outspent the pro-prop 8 people and yet the proposition was approved. This would indicate that money was not decisive. Or maybe that the mormon money is somehow more persuasive than non-mormon money. The idea of religous people involving themselves in political controversies does not shock me as it does some. Religous belief has never excluded one from the polity in this country, and if it did our country would have probably been worse off at several points in our history. Something to remember as you decide who to hate especially since this last weekend was the anniversary of a famous religous figure’s march on washington.

33

It doesn’t matter how much thought or not voters put into their voting decisions–the voters are still responsible for the result. That’s the whole principle of democracy.

34

I just recently watched the documentary, as I know and have met a few of the people featured in the film. As to the message of the film, I’d say it’s pretty spot on. The Mormon Church spent overwhelming amounts of money to finance the Yes on 8 campaign, which I think ultimately tipped the balance in favor.

However, the documentary itself is incredibly sloppy in regards to the images it shows. Most of the footage of the protests in and around San Francisco, and the shouting matches between supporters and opposition did NOT occur during the Prop 8 campaign in the months leading up to the November 2008 election, as the timeline and commentary of the film would have you believe. Actually, almost all of the footage was taken from broadcasts of the March protests in the following year. It seems to me like the makers of the film were doing a personal pet project, and only later once they got funding said 'Oh shit, we actually need footage now, so let’s go to the next protest!"

35

Bwah?

36

That is simply not true. Until the Mormons redoubled their efforts in the closing period of the campaign, the Prop was heading to a resounding defeat.

You are not in California, have not seen this film, or really, paid attention to any details about the campaign, right?

That is pretty shallow thinking. One church, as you claim, 1.7 % of the population matches the spending of the rest of the state in opposition, and for what? Not one person was persuaded by the campaign that resulted?

The nature of the hate and fear campaign that they buy with their money (as the film points out, this was not the first time) DOES appear to be persuasive among enough (but barely enough) voters.

It is losing its effectiveness though, and it barely carried the day this time.

Prop 22, Prop 8’s predecessor, won far more handily only 8 years prior.

This came down to the wire, even with the money and ugly campaign. ALL of the advantage from the previous vote was lost, there is no more margin for error should there ever be another vote. And there is still a very good chance there will be a vote in 2012. Young kids, who overwhelmingly don’t see this as an issue, will be able to vote in greater numbers by then, 4 years worth having turned 18, and that will be that.

Of course. The issue is, does the religious body violate its tax exemption, which is dependent on it not spending substantial resources on political positions. If it was the “Mormon Club” instead of the Mormon Church, well, they would have less money, and people would recognize the bizarreness of what they want for everyone for what it is. But they would be allowed to do it.

Really? You can’t name 5 giant differences off the top of your head? Like one group is trying to extend rights, a very American thing to do, and the other is trying to take away existing rights? Remember, until election day, in CA, people DID have the right to marry who they wanted, the next day they did not. If you think that is parallel to Rev. King’s message in any way shape or form, then well, this not being the pit, I can’t say what I think of that.

37

Actually,they were making a different film. One about the rash of suicides in the Mormon Community, and part way through they realized there was a bigger story there.

I don’t recall coming away with any sense that things were out of order or presented as other than what they are. Was it the best produced film of all time? No. But then there was probably little or no budget at all, either for the filming or the post-production.

As a film producer myself, I am quite certain this was a labor of love, in every sense of the word.

38

Since the mormons were outspent by the anti-prop 8 people by 2 to 1, it appears that the voters were exposed to the arguments of both sides. They were just convinced by the arguments of the pro-prop 8. Since the voters were the ones who made the decision after being exposed to both sides, they are the proper ones for anger. However, I understand that focused hatred is more fun, so rational arguments will probably not persuade anyone about this. On the bright side note_alice can see the future and she assures us the gays in California will only be living in sin a few more years.

39

The salient point that you’re overlooking is that Prop. 8 didn’t pass on the strength of its arguments, it passed on the strength of it’s lies, deceptions, and slanders. I’m unsure, personally, the extent to which the fundamentally dishonest nature of the Prop. 8 campaign excuses the people who fell for it, however, I don’t see a problem with holding a group that is both bigoted and deceitful in lower esteem than a group that is merely bigoted.

40

That is simply not true. Care to explain where you are getting this misinformation?

Actually, the hatred is in the law itself, there is nothing at all rational about it. As Judge Walker’s opinion found.

You are batting a perfect 100% wrong on everything in this thread. not_alice is not a “she”. Maybe alice is, but then doesn’t it follow that not_alice is what alice is not?
I am not aware of ANY gays “living in sin”, but I get the sense you are about to expose your true position here.

What I did say was that I don’t expect the law as it is in California to last long - either it will reach the Supreme Court and be tossed, it will die where it is in appeals right now due to no appellants with standing and be tossed, or the electorate will vote it out of existence soon.