Religious Freedom for all, or "It's all about the base*"

I am just as happy as a MarMoHo* can be. 

I had a lovely breakfast from McDonald's, I am at work on a pleasent morning, my daughter says she is going to do the dishes, and my church is trying to stay with the times while staying true to the words of the latter-day prophets of the Lord.  

All I need is a box of Chicken in a Biscuit and some tastefully pointy new leather shoes and I would be a snug bug.

I am really most pleased because I see progress. There were four steps made this week and only one step backward. Let me explain.

The LDS church has almost 6.5 members in the US (I keep thinking that this is a huge number but there were more people you-tubing Scott Sterling-Soccer Hero) This week Mormons become the second largest denomination to publicly support LGBT anti-discrimination legislation. As an FYI, the only religious group larger to support the legislation is the United Methodist Church.

Is it too little, too late as suggested by several national media groups?  

I always think more can be done - especially on a personal level. But being the second largest religious group to support this legislation? That's not so little.

Too late is the case for for Idaho who will have to wait for next year.  (See my last essay.) 

However, the Mormon Church’s position on this issue may well turn the tide on a bill just introduced in the Utah State Senate, so maybe not too late.

Oh, bother. It's always too late to some degree. The new laws usually come into effect because someone has already been hurt.  But too late to do the right thing.  I say no.  

So, pull up a chair and have a diet coke on me.  I am celebrating the statement itself and the influence it will have on the members of the church. 

Before we toss one back, this is what the statement made by the church didn't do:  It did not come out and say that it is OK for members of the church to openly support same sex marriage. Maybe it's not a necessary thing for them to come out and say. Maybe it is OK for the church to promote a bit of thinking and decision making for the members.

For myself, I support religious freedom and gay rights both. I believe in agency -- that if a man wants to marry another man he may choose to do so, or if a gay man wishes to follow the words of the prophets, he may do so as well. There are consequences for both. 

I also support the LDS church in saying that you can't be in full fellowship and be married to one of the same sex.  I also believe that the church has the right to dis-allow temple sealing in the temple.

This is not to say that Mormons have the right to exclude.  Mormons aren't given carte blanche to make unrighteous judgement and real Mormns who understand the gospel will never do so.  Mormons include and love and welcome others. Period.

The church did acknowledge that gay people have rights.  The leaders by their action also said that it is OK to be a member in good standing (Mormon terminology) and support our LGBT brothers and sisters.

Here is an area of caution that jumps out to me. Trying to anticipate what others are going to do based on limited previous experience is not always what it is cracked up to be. Mormons have been in positions where they have completely overcompensated and become aggressive in all the wrong ways. In other words, we often demand rights and privileges that we are not willing to allow for those not of our faith.

The Mormon persecution complex was developed because of actual persecution of Mormons 200 years ago.  It may be a good time to let it go.  Mormons are required to forgive and, if not forget, at least to hand it over to the Lord for judgement. Because Mormons know of atrocities perpetrated when freedom is denied, Mormons should be quick to watch over those who need protection regardless of what they look like or how high their heels are.

Mormons and non-Mormons alike have healing to do.

This from the press conference: "When religious people are publicly intimidated, retaliated against, forced from employment or made to suffer personal loss because they have raised their voice in the public square, donated to a cause or participated in an election, our democracy (and our society Cal Thompson may add) is the loser... Such tactics are every bit as wrong as denying access to employment, housing or public services because of race or gender." 

-Elder Dallan H.Oaks

*By the way, the real base is repentance and forgiveness.

No gay rights or Mormon rights this year in Idaho!

This week Idaho lawmakers stopped a bill in its tracks that would have created protections for GLBT communities. The proposed legislation would have added sexual orientation and gender identity into Idaho’s Human Rights Act.  Idaho GLBT rights groups have been trying for nine years to get legislation before their lawmakers. 

All of this comes two days after the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- of which I am a proud and loyal member, announced that it supported much of the nondiscrimination legislation presented by various states and municipalities.This latest bill would have granted job and housing protections for gay and transgender people.

I have been at the top  of the Idaho State
Capital Dome looking down.  Almost puked.

Idaho is the first state with an established Mormon population to have considered such a bill since the LDS church's announcement. Idaho's House State Affairs Committee consists of the Legislature’s conservative lawmakers and includes several Mormons. They voted 13 to 4 to prevent the bill from moving to the House floor effectively killing the bill and sucking the juice out of it. 

Keep reading, however for the silver spud lining.

The vote was split right down party lines -- Republicans opposing it and Democrats voting in favor of the bill. Bills of this nature are usually not revised and presented again in the same legislative section, so we are probably looking for something similar to be presented next year.

Tangent Alert: Next year. Perfect for doing what will be needed to get this through Idaho's house and senate. "What will be needed to pass a non-discrimination bill?" you ask? Blessed little.  I think it would have passed had the Churches announcement not come out ironically.  I think Mormon Republicans quickly pulled back to make sure that the "religious legislation passed as well - so they will go back and add that section to the bill and it will pass with many rainbow colors flying. It will read something like this -- gays can't be kicked out of their jobs or their apartments for being gay, and neither can Mormons for being Mormons, or Catholics for being Catholic, etc. Yes, we have gotten to the point where we have to legislate kindness, and dang it if we aren't going to. End of Tangent. Amen.

Monday's testimony in Idaho's State capital included an account by a transgender teenager who told of having been referred to as "it" by grade school teachers.  Several heartfelt storied were presented to the lawmakers and to more that one thousand visiting the capital to support the bill.

And now for...whatever this is:

Republican Representative Ken Andrus said this concerning the bills failure to pass: "If we pass the bill today as it is worded, it would create a barrier between you folks in favor of adding the words and the so-called straight community and it will be a giant step backwards, not forwards."

Let me rephrase that statement for those of you scratching your heads.

"If we pass this law it is just going to annoy the straight folk."  

Coming from a long line of straight Mormon folk -- a lot of us/them deserve to be annoyed. Not making waves is no excuse for allowing discrimination based on race, sex, color, religion, sexual preference or gender identity in situations of housing or employment.

Republican lawmakers said they worried the measure would lead to lawsuits against those who refused services to gay and transgender people based on religious beliefs  Maybe so. Therefore, let's add them as well!  Sign us all up. Grant protections to everyone. (We should have just allowed rights and respect to everyone from the beginning, but, heck, we can do it now with very little skin off of our nose.)

So, add religious people to those who want rights, and why not.

Doesn't everyone deserve them? 

Today's Mormon/gay made-up news is brought to you by...

CNN reported yesterday that the Mormon church is in a battle and that it wants to call a partial truce.  "In exchange" they say, "the Mormon church wants gay rights advocates -- and the government -- to back off."

Well, ain't that a great lead to a story. Unfortunately, the truth doesn't read that way at all.

What actually happened was that the leaders of the LDS church pledged continued support for anti-discrimination laws for the GLBT community -- and then compared these laws to those that protect the rights of religious groups.

The "new campaign" as per CNN, repeats language from a website the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints launched in 2012 encouraging members and non members alike to be "more accepting and compassionate toward gays".

The church made clear on that site and in a public announcement in 2009, that it opposes gay marriage and insists on its right to set its own boundaries within church-affiliated charities, schools, properties and businesses;  Read, continued stances on no gay marriage and attendance requirements for its world wide temples.

What was new-ish to many was the LDS churches stance on religious freedoms. Elder Dallin Oaks, a member of the church's Quorum of Twelve Apostles stated:

"When religious people are publicly intimidated, retaliated against, forced from employment or made to suffer personal loss because they have raised their voice in the public square, donated to a cause or participated in an election, our democracy is the loser."

"Such tactics are every bit as wrong as denying access to employment, housing or public services because of race or gender." Elder Oaks cited several examples on Tuesday, which included:

1) The mayor of Houston subpoenaing sermon notes last year from pastors who opposed an equal rights ordination. The subpoena was later dropped.

2) Public pressure placed on a LDS gymnast to step down as an Olympic liaison in 2011 because he had supported California's Proposition 8.

3) Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich was forced to resign because he had donated money to support the passage of Prop 8.

"It is one of today's great ironies that some people who have fought so hard for LGBT rights now try to deny the rights of others to disagree with their public policy proposals," said Elder Oaks.

To be clear, Tuesday's announcement doesn't change any church doctrine -- including its opposition to gay marriage. It was simply a reiteration of policy it had established in 2009. The timing seems deliberate to coincide with the start of a new Congress and new legislative sessions nationwide, which is a smart move.

Others are speaking up as well. Southern Baptists and Catholic bishops have recently joined the international conversation to support national laws that aim to protect religious freedom.

"We are suggesting a way forward in which those with different views on these complex issues can together seek solutions that will be fair to everyone," said Elder D. Todd Christofferson, a member of the LDS churches Quorum of Twelve Apostles.

Sen. Jim Dabakis, of the Utah State senate is openly gay. I only mention this because this of course directly affects him as a law maker and a member of the LGTB community.  He sighed "Amen," to the church's -- shall we say "historic" announcement.?  Let's do. Historic.

"I am proud that the LDS Church has seen fit to lead the way in non-discrimination," he said. "Now, let's roll up our sleeves, get to work and pass a statewide nondiscrimination bill."

A good thing?  Yes. It's the right thing to do, and I believe with all of my heart that the members and the leadership of the LDS church aches to do the right thing. It (again) acknowledges the GLBTs as people worthy of respect and love.

Out of the blue? Unexpected?  The church is "backing off?" No. But we -- like CNN -- appreciate a little drama.