Official Church statement: Respect for Marriage Act

[anonymous91]

AP Headline

"Mormon church comes out in support of same-sex marriage law"

Disgusting. We are now actively supporting the corruption of our culture and the very foundations of society in some mis guided attempt to avoid the pointing fingers from the great and spacious building.

We went from this statement, just a few years ago:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regrets today’s decision. California voters have twice been given the opportunity to vote on the definition of marriage in their state and both times have determined that marriage should be recognized as only between a man and a woman. We agree. Marriage between a man and woman is the bedrock of society. "

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes the deeply held feelings on both sides, but strongly affirms its belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The bedrock institution of marriage between a man and a woman has profound implications for our society. These implications range from what our children are taught in schools to individual and collective freedom of religious expression and practice."

To this:

"We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward. As we work together to preserve the principles and practices of religious freedom together with the rights of LGBTQ individuals, much can be accomplished to heal relationships and foster greater understanding."

These statements obviously oppose each other, how is that possible if our Prophet is supposed to be the mouthpiece of God?

[FrankOne]

Might as well talk about our "polygamist brothers and sisters rights"

If the Church did this I might start supporting Nelson. But until the setting in order, they sadly never will.

not to derail the topic, but if the govt said that they will include polygamy in that act, the church would not support it.

remember here, the Church is supporting this act. They could just remain silent or neutral and they are NOT . They are being vocal to SUPPORT IT.

The church has joined Klown world in full. Off the rails and getting in bed with Babylon.

[Christianlee]

Just shut up and give them your 10%.

https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/mormo ... x-marriage

[FrankOne]

The Respect for Marriage Act will be used as a hammer to destroy conservative, Godly principles. Mark my words.
Years ago, I had a dream wherein I was shown a store, where only Gays, or sexual alts could shop. My understanding is that the social shift will be so significant, that if you don't "unite with [them] and become acquainted with [their] secret works, and become [their] brethren that [we] may be like unto [them] 3 Nephi 3:7, we will simply not be allowed to participate in life.

here's a possible linking idea on your dream.

some have seen a literal separation of states in the future. Texas leads the conservative states. This isn't too far fetched since the time during Trump's admin , when something like 7 states signed agreements as a 'consortium of states' which chose to ignore the laws etc created by Trump.

Maybe the dream that you had could have been in one of the flaming liberal lgbtq+423 states?

[anonymous91]

The Respect for Marriage Act will be used as a hammer to destroy conservative, Godly principles. Mark my words.
Years ago, I had a dream wherein I was shown a store, where only Gays, or sexual alts could shop. My understanding is that the social shift will be so significant, that if you don't "unite with [them] and become acquainted with [their] secret works, and become [their] brethren that [we] may be like unto [them] 3 Nephi 3:7, we will simply not be allowed to participate in life.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least. We are already seeing this in other areas of life today.

For example, look at the feminism movement it is literally a hammer being used to emasculate men, and to tear down men any way that they can. Getting married now is a losing proposition for most men, and has been turned into a sick & twisted lottery system by some women, where children are used as pawns.

Abuse. Supposedly only women can be victims, and it's always men that are the Abusers. It couldn't possibly be true that both sexes could be victims of abuse, which would destroy the entire narrative.

Racism. For some strange reason, it's ok to be racist, if you're not white in today's society. In fact, it's not socially acceptable to even accuse someone of being racist if they aren't white. Supposedly you can only be racist if you are white, and they constantly remind you of it.

I'm sure there are other examples, but these readily came to mind.

[Alexander]

Just shut up and give them your 10%.

https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/mormo ... x-marriage

“the amendment "recognizes the importance of marriage, acknowledges that diverse beliefs and the people who hold them are due respect, and affirms that couples, including same-sex and interracial couples, deserve the dignity, stability and ongoing protection of marriage."”

[spiritMan]

What are they smoking?

"includes appropriate religious freedom protections"???
Oh really. Here is the bill. It's short. It does not mention the word religion one single time.
https://www.congress.gov/.../117th.../h ... /8404/text

[Chip]

"Interracial couples"?

As if to say there has been some recent issue with that, too.

It's all a mess of pottage now.

[anonymous91]

Wow...

The AFA (AMERICAN FAMLY ASSOCIATION) has this to say:

"The Respect for Marriage Act would provide federal protection for same-sex marriage. It has ALREADY passed the U.S. House, with 47 Republican votes. If we don’t act now, it will pass the U.S. Senate this week.

The Democrats need 10 Republican senators to support their radical agenda. We need YOU to push back. We need you to flood your Republican senators’ offices and tell them to vote “No!” on the Respect for Marriage Act.

The purpose of the Respect for Marriage Act is to make sure conservatives never restore traditional marriage. The bill would make it very difficult to overturn existing Supreme Court opinions using the same approach we used to reverse Roe v. Wade. That approach entailed working with state legislatures to encourage the courts to continually revisit the issue of abortion, to continually question whether abortion is protected under the 14th Amendment, and to continually tell the truth about the sanctity of human life.

"If the Respect for Marriage Act passes, this strategic approach will become very difficult. The Left knows this – and they are hoping the American public doesn’t care. They are hoping Christians will be divided – and silent. We cannot be silent. We must tell the truth about marriage – that there is simply no such thing as a “same-sex” marriage. Call it what you will – a “civil union,” a “mutual tax-benefit association,” a “formal roommate arrangement”… but it’s not marriage. It’s just not."

So who is the real Christian orgnization here? My vote is AFA.

I 100% agree. There is one reason that this was coined as a "same-sex marriage" and it has nothing to do with legal rights & privileges. It has everything to do with an attack on Christianity and inverting the sacred act of marriage (Satan is mocking what God put in place).

There are zero reasons that this can't be called a Civil-union, legal same-sex partnership, or anything else that doesn't attack the institution of marriage, just as The Red Pill is saying above. They won't do this though, because they are lying about what their true purposes really are.

[Alexander]

Wow...

The AFA (AMERICAN FAMLY ASSOCIATION) has this to say:

"The Respect for Marriage Act would provide federal protection for same-sex marriage. It has ALREADY passed the U.S. House, with 47 Republican votes. If we don’t act now, it will pass the U.S. Senate this week.

The Democrats need 10 Republican senators to support their radical agenda. We need YOU to push back. We need you to flood your Republican senators’ offices and tell them to vote “No!” on the Respect for Marriage Act.

The purpose of the Respect for Marriage Act is to make sure conservatives never restore traditional marriage. The bill would make it very difficult to overturn existing Supreme Court opinions using the same approach we used to reverse Roe v. Wade. That approach entailed working with state legislatures to encourage the courts to continually revisit the issue of abortion, to continually question whether abortion is protected under the 14th Amendment, and to continually tell the truth about the sanctity of human life.

"If the Respect for Marriage Act passes, this strategic approach will become very difficult. The Left knows this – and they are hoping the American public doesn’t care. They are hoping Christians will be divided – and silent. We cannot be silent. We must tell the truth about marriage – that there is simply no such thing as a “same-sex” marriage. Call it what you will – a “civil union,” a “mutual tax-benefit association,” a “formal roommate arrangement”… but it’s not marriage. It’s just not."

So who is the real Christian orgnization here? My vote is AFA.

The encroaching state is the scorpion; the church is the frog.

[largerthanlife2]

Sodom and Gomorrah has full support of the church.

[HereWeGo]

These statements obviously oppose each other, how is that possible if our Prophet is supposed to be the mouthpiece of God?

Simple answer. He is supposed to be the mouthpiece. He isn't in reality.

[BuriedTartaria]

Thoughts?

Part of me respects it. Part of me says this is complete, absolute double talking. Doesn't supporting the rights of our LGBT brothers and sisters meaning supporting them and their rights to be married? I mean doesn't it? So a more straight-laced reading of the statement is "our doctrine continues to be the same, but we respect the law and the rights of our LGBT sisters, which includes their marriages, which means we do respect **their marriages and their rights to marriage**."

I'm not trying to be petty here, but how is this not having your cake and eating it too?

**which actually goes against the Proclamation to the world. We were warned against supporting abnormal practice of marriage and we were told it would bring about calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets


This is no different than when Joe Biden says "look, I'm a catholic, and I'm opposed to abortion, but not everyone has my views and they need the right to abortion"

I'm not going to bash them incessantly for no reason but I'm not going to give them props on something that isn't very bold or brave to say especially when it stresses respecting the rights (which promotes growth) of abnormal concepts of marriage we were warned about.

Just another slippery slope.

Went from fighting for "marriage equality" to "transgender indoctrination in grade schools and fighting for the rights of minors to make the decision to undergo hormone therapy and/or genital mutilating treatment" to "transition" in about the span of 12 years

[Joan7]

Wow...

The AFA (AMERICAN FAMLY ASSOCIATION) has this to say:

"The Respect for Marriage Act would provide federal protection for same-sex marriage. It has ALREADY passed the U.S. House, with 47 Republican votes. If we don’t act now, it will pass the U.S. Senate this week.

The Democrats need 10 Republican senators to support their radical agenda. We need YOU to push back. We need you to flood your Republican senators’ offices and tell them to vote “No!” on the Respect for Marriage Act.

The purpose of the Respect for Marriage Act is to make sure conservatives never restore traditional marriage. The bill would make it very difficult to overturn existing Supreme Court opinions using the same approach we used to reverse Roe v. Wade. That approach entailed working with state legislatures to encourage the courts to continually revisit the issue of abortion, to continually question whether abortion is protected under the 14th Amendment, and to continually tell the truth about the sanctity of human life.

"If the Respect for Marriage Act passes, this strategic approach will become very difficult. The Left knows this – and they are hoping the American public doesn’t care. They are hoping Christians will be divided – and silent. We cannot be silent. We must tell the truth about marriage – that there is simply no such thing as a “same-sex” marriage. Call it what you will – a “civil union,” a “mutual tax-benefit association,” a “formal roommate arrangement”… but it’s not marriage. It’s just not."

So who is the real Christian orgnization here? My vote is AFA.

The encroaching state is the scorpion; the church is the frog.

Unfortunately, given what has transpired and what the leaders have caused the members to do, and to believe, I see that scorpion as President Russell M Nelson, and his conspiring team. And the poor, unwise frog, are the individual members of the church. Not to much different than the 5 sleeping women who were waiting for the bridegroom without enough oil.

[h_p]

The Church does not believe in FORCING governments to adhere to its definition of marriage. Nor does it believe that the government has the right to FORCE a specific definition of marriage on people who might disagree with this interpretation. The moment the government starts to abuse that power, the Church will be forceful amongst the opponents on that abuse of power.

The problem is that at the end of the day, the legal definition of marriage is the one we're all going to have to use, regardless of what anybody's personal beliefs are. If the government says two men are married, everybody has to use that definition. We don't get to make up our own. One can say they don't recognize gay marriage, but you will absolutely NOT be able to say in public that two people legally married are not actually married. Not unless you want to be driven from society. A ridiculous law like this is irrelevant.

The traditional marriage team lost the battle in 2015. The quislings are just saying "please eat us last" now.

[h_p]

What are they smoking?

"includes appropriate religious freedom protections"???
Oh really. Here is the bill. It's short. It does not mention the word religion one single time.
https://www.congress.gov/.../117th.../h ... /8404/text

There's not any sort of protection for anyone at all still wanting to believe in traditional marriage. There's absolutely nothing in this bill that the church is saying they want. So they're officially supporting a bill (authored by two left-wing Democrats, no less) on the hope that somebody's going to throw them a bone eventually?

[An Eye Single]

What are they smoking?

"includes appropriate religious freedom protections"???
Oh really. Here is the bill. It's short. It does not mention the word religion one single time.
https://www.congress.gov/.../117th.../h ... /8404/text

Does this link work for others? It’s not working for me. :/

[h_p]

What are they smoking?

"includes appropriate religious freedom protections"???
Oh really. Here is the bill. It's short. It does not mention the word religion one single time.
https://www.congress.gov/.../117th.../h ... /8404/text

Does this link work for others? It’s not working for me. :/

HR 8404: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con ... -bill/8404

Corresponding Senate bill (S.4556): https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con ... -bill/4556

[Moroni104]

So, let me be clear, I hate the Church's evolving position on LGBTQ positions; I liked the Proclamation on the Famliy, not what they are doing now.. The Church's evolution causes me to lose sleep on a regular basis. It causes me to question everything I know.

However, let me show you how this statement reads to me:

"We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward."

This is not actually an endorsement of the "Respect for Marriage Act" act.

It is saying, "we thank those who are trying to amend this act to include religious freedoms".

Here, read the whole thing in full again, and instead of the word ensure, think amend., as there certainly are not religious freedoms in this bill now..

"The doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints related to marriage between a man and a woman is well known and will remain unchanged.

We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure (that would mean AMEND) the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward. As we work together to preserve the principles and practices of religious freedom together with the rights of LGBTQ individuals, much can be accomplished to heal relationships and foster greater understanding."

I actually really like that they say the doctrine "will remain unchanged".

While I'd rather the Church just said "We don't support the Respect for Marriage Act" , It is better that they seem to be asking for it to be amended than just saying they support it.

Unfortunately, they chose the word "ensure" which is a strange choice of words when they could have said "amend". But, I can see no other way to read what they are asking for.

[hedgehog]

"Mr Fox, we will vote to let you in the henhouse but only if you double super promise to not eat us."

There are two types of people. People who, as children, were betrayed by the adults they trusted. And naïve fools who don't understand how the world works.

I zero percent believe the Lord will arrive and save us before this bill comes due. In fact I think this is part of his plan. I am old enough that I saw the left push for "don't ask don't tell" and the right opposed it, and then only a few years the left showcasing don't ask don't tell as institutionalized discrimination and the right insisting it should be conserved. From at least Woodrow Wilson until now this has been the dynamic repeated ad nauseum. Crowbar and the anchor. The tailgater and the fast lane squater. I am convinced the Lord wants something different from his saints than failed conservativism.

That established, I would bet literally every penny I own, that in just a few short years, the amendment they got added onto this bill will be held up as evidence of institionalized discrimination, and the right will be demanding we should go back to this standard where religion has this carve out for protection.

Secondly, If you have talked to todays church youth you would already know, the future. Majority support for Gay Temple marriage in the church is inevitable. Since they always make the comparison, just imagine if any church leadership today tried to reinstitute blacks not having the priesthood or excommunication for divorce. etc. Their would be an early church tier violence and mass apostasy (do you see the plan yet?) Even the saints kids over much of the world have been conditioned for this agenda in media, education, and culturally their whole lives. Their brains are now incapable of rejecting it. Now its just a question of time.

Seeing this car crash coming, IMO Church, should immediately disconnect temple marriage from government marriage and even changes its name from Temple Marriage to sealing ceremony. If it has even one tie to legal marriage they will have the power to come for it. With that tie broken, the next fight for the Temple would be like a country club that is trying to ban certain protected groups. This again will be a lowered stakes and losing proposition between worldy pressure and saints children being brainwashed but again kick the can down the road, but to what end?

Or a new Prophet comes in, drives out those brainwashed by the world. World and apostates turn against us and start exterminating us. Before the totally succeed, an apostalic cursing is sealed upon this people and lands against all those who have fought for to change the church to fit the world. Then the storms comes and only the very few faithful who rejected the world are still standing. Either way bumpy roads ahead. Ironically, they refuse to peacefully coexist with the gospel.

Somedays I want to hit my head with a hammer until my IQ drops enough, so that I can enjoy TV and stop seeing what is happening.

[hedgehog]

Part 2 big picture. Ruling Israel has always been divided between scepter and birthright of Ephraim and Judah and will be until the end of the millennium.

I find it fascinating that during the millennium the lord will separate these two houses. Joseph will govern Temporal affairs from New Jerusalem. Old Jerusalem will govern spiritual affairs. When if you consider which group now controls temporal matters and which controls spiritual matters from salt lake, you will see right now we have roles reversed much to everyone's suffering. That is as unsubtle as I will get. I am convinced Nephi's vision shows an American holocaust of the saints, is coming and what is being written even here on this page, might be used against us soviet inquisition style. And is even now being monitored and infiltrated by our own government.... and has been since 2010.

Final scenario that this is all spiritually fine. That at this the moment of Evils greatest power yet, his plan is to advance the Lords plans, and only now are we enlightened and right side of history humans are now open to these higher matters, openly contradicts everything we have been taught about the plan of salvation. Every part of it reeks of Lucifers plan and not our Saviors. I would not bet my soul on this scenario.

I feel great sorrow for those who have tricked by the flattery to their vanity and who have blindly virtue signaled themselves and their children, off the straight and narrow path. But that is why there are three kingdoms of glory and outerdarkness. There are many good people in the world today, who would have an spiritual allergic reaction to the "cis-het normative nuclear family with traditional gender roles" nature of the celestial kingdom and scream of it being offensive and would desire to flee such a place. Sad, the loss is theirs.

[HVDC]

"Interracial couples"?

As if to say there has been some recent issue with that, too.

It's all a mess of pottage now.

Pandora's Box has a lot of things in it.

Can't just pick the ones we like.

And leave the rest.

Sir H

[anonymous91]

So, let me be clear, I hate the Church's evolving position on LGBTQ positions; I liked the Proclamation on the Famliy, not what they are doing now.. The Church's evolution causes me to lose sleep on a regular basis. It causes me to question everything I know.

However, let me show you how this statement reads to me:

"We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward."

This is not actually an endorsement of the "Respect for Marriage Act" act.

It is saying, "we thank those who are trying to amend this act to include religious freedoms".

Here, read the whole thing in full again, and instead of the word ensure, think amend., as there certainly are not religious freedoms in this bill now..

"The doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints related to marriage between a man and a woman is well known and will remain unchanged.

We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure (that would mean AMEND) the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward. As we work together to preserve the principles and practices of religious freedom together with the rights of LGBTQ individuals, much can be accomplished to heal relationships and foster greater understanding."

I actually really like that they say the doctrine "will remain unchanged".

While I'd rather the Church just said "We don't support the Respect for Marriage Act" , It is better that they seem to be asking for it to be amended than just saying they support it.

Unfortunately, they chose the word "ensure" which is a strange choice of words when they could have said "amend". But, I can see no other way to read what they are asking for.

Words matter, or at least they should. The blatant issue I have with the official Church and its position on just about everything polarizing today is their doublespeak. One group will interpret it one way, and another group will interpret it another way. The church is riding the fence and refuses to be transparent. SMH

[Christianlee]

I think the Church is fooling itself if it really believes religious freedom will be protected.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/11/15/go ... -marriage/

[spiritMan]

So, let me be clear, I hate the Church's evolving position on LGBTQ positions; I liked the Proclamation on the Famliy, not what they are doing now.. The Church's evolution causes me to lose sleep on a regular basis. It causes me to question everything I know.

However, let me show you how this statement reads to me:

"We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward."

This is not actually an endorsement of the "Respect for Marriage Act" act.

It is saying, "we thank those who are trying to amend this act to include religious freedoms".

Here, read the whole thing in full again, and instead of the word ensure, think amend., as there certainly are not religious freedoms in this bill now..

"The doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints related to marriage between a man and a woman is well known and will remain unchanged.

We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure (that would mean AMEND) the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward. As we work together to preserve the principles and practices of religious freedom together with the rights of LGBTQ individuals, much can be accomplished to heal relationships and foster greater understanding."

I actually really like that they say the doctrine "will remain unchanged".

While I'd rather the Church just said "We don't support the Respect for Marriage Act" , It is better that they seem to be asking for it to be amended than just saying they support it.

Unfortunately, they chose the word "ensure" which is a strange choice of words when they could have said "amend". But, I can see no other way to read what they are asking for.

The first amendment says Hi.

There is absolutely 0 need for any modification to the bill to"protect" religion. It's in the blooming 1A.

Call it what it is, this is a full throated endorsement of LEGAL SSM by the Church.