Proposition 8

I have been following the news on this, as well as a blog from some friends in LA who has been very active in supporting proposition 8.   

I would have voted yes on Prop 8. Not because I have any intention of stopping two consenting adults from choosing whatever relationship they want, but because of my religious/doctrinal beliefs about Marriage. At the same time, I have no opposition to civil unions, and support same sex couples having the legal rights and access to their partner that married heterosexual couples have. 

The two things that bother me is how my church is being accused of homophobia and bigotry, and how the gay community has reacted to the results of the proposition.  

The LDS Church has very defined doctrine and commandments about human sexuality.  Church doctrine requires members to obey the law of chastity and not have sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage.  This doctine applies equally to both heterosexual and homosexual individuals.  Recognizing the greater burden this commandment becomes on homosexual individuals, the church, over the past decade, has tried to reach out with greater support for same-sex attracted members who are trying live their religion. Some actions or behaviors of individual members or local leaders may have given the impression of the church being intolerant towards homosexuality, but the general leadership of the church has worked hard to reach out and support same-sex attracted individuals without apologizing for or compromising church doctrine.    

To me, gay marriage is very much an issue where tolerance has to go both ways. The religious communities that were major forces behind proposition 8 have no opposition to civil unions.  But the gay community doesn't appear to be in this for the rights they argue about. It seems that they are using same-sex marriage as a wedge for forcing religious conservatives to accept or recognize, approve, institutionalize, etc.. their lifestyle and consider it as coequal to traditional marriage. They want religious conservatives to say, "okay, this is just a semantics issue, it is no big deal," about an institution that the religious community regards as a very big deal. 

Honestly, what bothers me most on a political level is the gay community's reaction to the results of the proposition. They forced the issue into the courts and were very satisfied with a non-legislative ruling allowing same-sex marriage under the California State Constitution. But when another group successfully uses the the actual constitutional process for amending the California state constitution via popular referendum, all of a sudden they insist that nothing short of a state legislative action within the walls of the capitol building is acceptable. 

You can't have it both ways. Short-circuiting the legislative process via the courts is the favored way of minority groups for establishing rights, but it has only led to further polarization and problems, creating long-term cultural wedges like Roe v Wade.