Comments on: Parker v. Hurley Examined http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44 Voicing our support for same-sex marriage, and our respectful opposition to California’s Proposition 8 Thu, 09 Sep 2010 03:33:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Sheri http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-2400 Sheri Tue, 24 Mar 2009 19:02:48 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-2400 In order to productively work through my anger over Prop 8 and Prop 22 where gays have been demonized by the Christian community as the very force that will bring down society should they get the sacred privilege to legally marry, I wrote a book which is currently at the publisher. The title is, The Spell of Religion ….and the Battle Over Gay Marriage. I’d like to share an excerpt from the book here – particularly for Michaelitos. 'As has been clearly demonstrated over the centuries, souls who come into this world with same gender attraction have been persecuted, shunned, murdered and driven to suicide, all in the name of God. The time has come to STOP the cycle of violence against our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender brothers and sisters. The time has come to accept them in all their goodness and beauty as children of God. They are not different from us, they are part of us. Those who can make this shift in consciousness will be richer and more fulfilled because of it--I promise. Truth has a path in the here and now and can only be arrived at with an open heart and mind. To be taught that we may never in this life completely understand the reason for our obedience to certain rules, (i.e. denying gay couples the opportunity to legally marry the person they love) and that it will all be revealed in the next, keeps us from following a logical path to truth. God is not illogical and would never expect us to be. I love the basic premise for the book, A Course in Miracles, which is; Nothing real can be threatened, Nothing unreal exists - Herein lies the peace of God.' If the institution of marriage is real, allowing same gender couples to share that institution threatens no-one and no-thing. But continuing to contend that they are not equal, or good enough, or worthy of marriage, is causing irreparable harm, and those unwilling to see our gay brothers and sisters as the children of God they really are, equal in every way, will one day be held accountable for the consequences of their intolerance, of this I can testify. In order to productively work through my anger over Prop 8 and Prop 22 where gays have been demonized by the Christian community as the very force that will bring down society should they get the sacred privilege to legally marry, I wrote a book which is currently at the publisher. The title is, The Spell of Religion ….and the Battle Over Gay Marriage. I’d like to share an excerpt from the book here – particularly for Michaelitos.

‘As has been clearly demonstrated over the centuries, souls who come into this world with same gender attraction have been persecuted, shunned, murdered and driven to suicide, all in the name of God. The time has come to STOP the cycle of violence against our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender brothers and sisters. The time has come to accept them in all their goodness and beauty as children of God. They are not different from us, they are part of us. Those who can make this shift in consciousness will be richer and more fulfilled because of it–I promise.

Truth has a path in the here and now and can only be arrived at with an open heart and mind. To be taught that we may never in this life completely understand the reason for our obedience to certain rules, (i.e. denying gay couples the opportunity to legally marry the person they love) and that it will all be revealed in the next, keeps us from following a logical path to truth. God is not illogical and would never expect us to be. I love the basic premise for the book, A Course in Miracles, which is; Nothing real can be threatened, Nothing unreal exists - Herein lies the peace of God.’

If the institution of marriage is real, allowing same gender couples to share that institution threatens no-one and no-thing. But continuing to contend that they are not equal, or good enough, or worthy of marriage, is causing irreparable harm, and those unwilling to see our gay brothers and sisters as the children of God they really are, equal in every way, will one day be held accountable for the consequences of their intolerance, of this I can testify.

]]> By: Michaelitos http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-2399 Michaelitos Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:10:38 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-2399 Dear Mr. Thurston, I actually take issue with your analysis on one point. I think you blur the line between tolerance and acceptance. Your logic implies that the two terms are synonymous, when in fact they are not. You stated, “If one feels that it is bad for society to become more tolerant of committed gay relationships, then I would agree that legalizing gay marriages will gradually tend to bring about that tolerance. . .” Tolerance is an idea that is at the heart of the American experience, from the Pilgrims to the Founding Fathers. However, acceptance is quite different. As an active member of the LDS Church, I do not accept homosexual relationships as morally acceptable. However, I am tolerant to that lifestyle (and yes, I do have a couple of friends that identify themselves as “gay”). In your statement quoted above, I’m not necessarily opposed to a tolerance of committed gay relationships; I don’t oppose civil unions. However, if you change the word “tolerant” to “accepting”, then I would oppose the statement vehemently; marriage is an institution meant for the union of man and woman, as ordained by God. Dear Mr. Thurston,
I actually take issue with your analysis on one point. I think you blur the line between tolerance and acceptance. Your logic implies that the two terms are synonymous, when in fact they are not.

You stated, “If one feels that it is bad for society to become more tolerant of committed gay relationships, then I would agree that legalizing gay marriages will gradually tend to bring about that tolerance. . .” Tolerance is an idea that is at the heart of the American experience, from the Pilgrims to the Founding Fathers. However, acceptance is quite different.

As an active member of the LDS Church, I do not accept homosexual relationships as morally acceptable. However, I am tolerant to that lifestyle (and yes, I do have a couple of friends that identify themselves as “gay”). In your statement quoted above, I’m not necessarily opposed to a tolerance of committed gay relationships; I don’t oppose civil unions. However, if you change the word “tolerant” to “accepting”, then I would oppose the statement vehemently; marriage is an institution meant for the union of man and woman, as ordained by God.

]]> By: Fiona64 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-1019 Fiona64 Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:57:41 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-1019 Dear Mr. Willis (Message 17): CA state law already requires an "opt out" be available for health education. Parents must sign a permission slip for any child, grades k-12, to participate in health education. The default position is that if no slip is returned, the child does not participate in the curriculum. Unfortunately, if this proposition were as much about "children and preserving the marriage" as the proponents like to say, it would actually say something about that. It takes away rights from 5-10% of the population, and does nothing about the 90-95 percent who have always had the right to marry. It says not one word about children. As already pointed out on this website, the pro-8/102/2 (that's the FL bill) are resorting to dishonesty in their desperation to enshrine discrimination into the law. I am astonished that we are going through this in CA in particular, since my state was the first to strike down its discriminatory anti-miscegenation law in 1948. And yes, there are definite parallels to this battle and the right for couples of different ethnicities to marry. Sad that people do not know better in this day and age. :-( Dear Mr. Willis (Message 17):

CA state law already requires an “opt out” be available for health education. Parents must sign a permission slip for any child, grades k-12, to participate in health education. The default position is that if no slip is returned, the child does not participate in the curriculum.

Unfortunately, if this proposition were as much about “children and preserving the marriage” as the proponents like to say, it would actually say something about that. It takes away rights from 5-10% of the population, and does nothing about the 90-95 percent who have always had the right to marry. It says not one word about children. As already pointed out on this website, the pro-8/102/2 (that’s the FL bill) are resorting to dishonesty in their desperation to enshrine discrimination into the law. I am astonished that we are going through this in CA in particular, since my state was the first to strike down its discriminatory anti-miscegenation law in 1948.

And yes, there are definite parallels to this battle and the right for couples of different ethnicities to marry. Sad that people do not know better in this day and age. :-(

]]> By: Lisa http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-1000 Lisa Tue, 04 Nov 2008 04:03:19 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-1000 You could substitute the words "black people" for "same sex marriage" and the arguments would be exactly as they were 50 years ago. People are afraid, afraid of change. But as long as love is involved, and the change is for reasons of love, there is nothing to fear. Only change due to fear and hatred is wrong. I grew up knowing people who loved each other, some were married and some weren't. Most were man/woman couples, and some were man/man couples. I seemed to grow up just fine. I dated the opposite sex, I had friends who were gay and straight, I went to college, I got a job working at a very family friendly company and married someone of the opposite sex. My daughter has a friend who has two mommies. Yes, it is out there and needs to be taught that it is OK. I want her to grow up to be a loving and tolerant person, not one filled with fear and hatred. You could substitute the words “black people” for “same sex marriage” and the arguments would be exactly as they were 50 years ago. People are afraid, afraid of change. But as long as love is involved, and the change is for reasons of love, there is nothing to fear. Only change due to fear and hatred is wrong. I grew up knowing people who loved each other, some were married and some weren’t. Most were man/woman couples, and some were man/man couples. I seemed to grow up just fine. I dated the opposite sex, I had friends who were gay and straight, I went to college, I got a job working at a very family friendly company and married someone of the opposite sex. My daughter has a friend who has two mommies. Yes, it is out there and needs to be taught that it is OK. I want her to grow up to be a loving and tolerant person, not one filled with fear and hatred.

]]> By: Dulce Bautista http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-801 Dulce Bautista Sun, 26 Oct 2008 05:44:37 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-801 I am catholic, my family is quite traditional, yet we all seem to have an unspoken agreement of tolerance. We respect others as long as they respect us. Through out my life this has helped me keep an open mind to the diversity of people and their lifestyles. I love my friends and am all for their cause, their relationships have lasted longer than any of mine. They love and respect those around them, they've been there for me when no one else wanted to stay. The ads being used on this issue (prop 8 ) anger me and sadden me because of how misleading and disrespectful they are, not just towards homosexuals but to all of us. They seem to think we're stupid and ignorant. I hope my son's generation has a more tolerant population. (he's only 12 months, but I will make sure he learns respect and tolerance.) I am catholic, my family is quite traditional, yet we all seem to have an unspoken agreement of tolerance. We respect others as long as they respect us. Through out my life this has helped me keep an open mind to the diversity of people and their lifestyles. I love my friends and am all for their cause, their relationships have lasted longer than any of mine. They love and respect those around them, they’ve been there for me when no one else wanted to stay. The ads being used on this issue (prop 8 ) anger me and sadden me because of how misleading and disrespectful they are, not just towards homosexuals but to all of us. They seem to think we’re stupid and ignorant. I hope my son’s generation has a more tolerant population. (he’s only 12 months, but I will make sure he learns respect and tolerance.)

]]> By: john willis http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-715 john willis Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:41:11 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-715 I am an attorney and I read the Parker v. Hurley case. I think the First Circuit's legal reasoning was sound and the Supreme Court was right to deny review. I agree that the Wirthlin plaintiff's case was more difficult. I agree with the court that there is no constitutional right for parents to insist that a public school curriculmn argee with their religous and moral beliefs. As a matter of public policy I would support the passage of a statute that gave parents the right to "opt out " of presentations like this. But I do not believe that it mandated ny the free exercise clause of the First amendment or any other provision of the Constitution. The outcome of this case was determined by principles of contitutional law and had nothing to do with Gay Marriage being legal in Massacussetts. I wish the church would of pushed for things like "opt out" provisions and religious exemptions fo state and federal laws banning discrimination against Gays. I think lobbying efforts in these areas would be much more fruitful than the efforts to defeat proposition 8. The campagin against proposition 8 has created bad feelings within the church itself and reinforced negative sterrotypes of the Church by non- members. The Church will lose in more ways than one regardless of if proposition 8 passes or not. FYI--- The Wirthlin plaintiff in Parker v. Hurley was a grandson of apostle Joseph Wirthlin. I am an attorney and I read the Parker v. Hurley case. I think the First Circuit’s legal reasoning was sound and the Supreme Court was right to deny review. I agree that the Wirthlin plaintiff’s case was more difficult. I agree with the court that there is no constitutional right for parents to insist that a public school curriculmn argee with their religous and moral beliefs.
As a matter of public policy I would support the passage of a statute that gave parents the right to “opt out ” of presentations like this. But I do not believe that it mandated ny the free exercise clause of the First amendment or any other provision of the Constitution.
The outcome of this case was determined by principles of contitutional law and had nothing to do with Gay Marriage being legal in Massacussetts.
I wish the church would of pushed for things like “opt out” provisions and religious exemptions fo state and federal laws banning discrimination against Gays. I think lobbying efforts in these areas would be much more fruitful than the efforts to defeat proposition 8.
The campagin against proposition 8 has created bad feelings within the church itself and reinforced negative sterrotypes of the Church by non- members.
The Church will lose in more ways than one regardless of if proposition 8 passes or not.
FYI— The Wirthlin plaintiff in Parker v. Hurley was a grandson of apostle Joseph Wirthlin.

]]> By: Marc Luxe http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-700 Marc Luxe Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:27:52 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-700 Green Eggs and Ham: The Analogy. So if the Parker v. Hurley case was successful, then the Dr. Seuss classic would be banned in schools under the right to be free of religious indoctrination in schools. Green Eggs and Ham would be an affront to both kosher and Adventists traditions [no pork, no meat], no history books on wars [Quakers and pacifism], no Harry Potter [anti-magic fundamentalist], no books on Edison or Franklin [Amish and electricity]. Now that's a slippery slope! Also: just who paid for a federal lawsuit and two appeals? The answer: This case was all about political grandstanding. I gotta hand it to the Parkers, et al. for brilliant strategic planning. Too bad it's all about misleading the public with lies, and raping constitutional protections. Green Eggs and Ham: The Analogy.

So if the Parker v. Hurley case was successful, then the Dr. Seuss classic would be banned in schools under the right to be free of religious indoctrination in schools. Green Eggs and Ham would be an affront to both kosher and Adventists traditions [no pork, no meat], no history books on wars [Quakers and pacifism], no Harry Potter [anti-magic fundamentalist], no books on Edison or Franklin [Amish and electricity]. Now that’s a slippery slope!

Also: just who paid for a federal lawsuit and two appeals?
The answer: This case was all about political grandstanding. I gotta hand it to the Parkers, et al. for brilliant strategic planning. Too bad it’s all about misleading the public with lies, and raping constitutional protections.

]]> By: » Yes to Proposition 8 - No to Same-Sex Marriage Instruction - Rickety http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-682 » Yes to Proposition 8 - No to Same-Sex Marriage Instruction - Rickety Wed, 22 Oct 2008 02:24:36 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-682 [...] Parker v. Hurley, 474 F. Supp. 2d 261 (D. Mass. 2007), a federal district court in Massachusetts held against [...] [...] Parker v. Hurley, 474 F. Supp. 2d 261 (D. Mass. 2007), a federal district court in Massachusetts held against [...]

]]> By: ama http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-544 ama Thu, 16 Oct 2008 05:42:46 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-544 Thank you for this post. I just wrote an article over at my blog, www.graceforgrace.com about this and at first I thought he was arrested for not supporting gay rights, but I had my doubts. This blog answered a lot of questions for me and hopefully for all the readers that frequent my blog. thanks! www.graceforgrace.com Thank you for this post. I just wrote an article over at my blog, http://www.graceforgrace.com about this and at first I thought he was arrested for not supporting gay rights, but I had my doubts. This blog answered a lot of questions for me and hopefully for all the readers that frequent my blog.

thanks!

http://www.graceforgrace.com

]]> By: Father put in Jail for not Allowing Same-sex Marriage to be Taught to his Child at School « Grace for Grace http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-543 Father put in Jail for not Allowing Same-sex Marriage to be Taught to his Child at School « Grace for Grace Thu, 16 Oct 2008 05:30:29 +0000 http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=44#comment-543 [...] at length over at the Mormons for Marriage site. One commenter seemed to indicate that the father deliberately tried to get arrested. Here is the relevant portion of that comment: According to the press release submitted by Hurley [...] [...] at length over at the Mormons for Marriage site. One commenter seemed to indicate that the father deliberately tried to get arrested. Here is the relevant portion of that comment: According to the press release submitted by Hurley [...]

]]>