Vermont house passes gay marriage bill

[Col. Flagg]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/02/vermon ... index.html

(CNN) -- The Vermont House on Thursday passed a same-sex marriage bill by 95-52, which is not enough of a margin to override a veto promised by the governor.

At least the Governor plans to veto it.

[Blip]

I say that is a church issue and not a gov issue. If a church decides they want to marry them then let them be married. I don't care. None of the government's business.

[Spence]

Didn't someone say that churches started marrying gays a long time ago before marriage licenses, and attrition took care of it.

Still Satan is very patient. Whats that saying?, the first generations rejects it, the next accepts it and the third embraces it. Well, I think we are approaching that third generation, probably my generation, that is going to accept gay marriage. I remember just 15 years ago when a TV show with gays or gay affection in it was super taboo, now it doesn't raise an eyebrow. Slowly but surely...

Even though I am in favor of getting gov. out of marriage, in 10-20 years the vast majority of the population will embrace gay marriage. So even if they were out of it, it won't matter, because the people will choose it.

Adversity to weed out the wicked and force the righteous to repent is the only way we could win this battle.

[AussieOi]

does anyone know why (non californian) members thought it significant to fight for the bill in california but arent doing similar (fighting for/ against) in other states?

[Blip]

does anyone know why (non californian) members thought it significant to fight for the bill in california but arent doing similar (fighting for/ against) in other states?

I can offer a maybe opinion. Cali is a trend-setter. Everything spreads like a disease from their/there. A good battle ground for this sort of thing if you can only choose one place..Just a thought. It certainly makes a statment to the world. I am actually suprised the church got involved with that. I thought it was a bit odd. But what happens in cali happens everywhere else in the states and the maybe the world. Hollywood is there? Good media. Strike the beast at it's heart? I don't know.

The saints must have it a little harder there in many ways. I have been to Cali many times. I loved it. The coast was nice. Half the people?..Not so good. It is beautiful, but so superficial.

If you think Americans are stupid and selfish then start with urban California. Half the women their....Blank stare. I had one call me boring and shallow in a 5 minute conversation!...If you can call it a conversation. Many are no more then the products they wear. I am boring for having jeans or BDU's and a T-shirt. They could "so dress me up". Can you cook? Eat wild game? Sew? Pick up a gun and fight if you got to? That is what I asked them. I am a shallow bigot though? That is what I like about mormon girls. They like the crafts. I do too, but I suck at a lot of it. If I had half a brain I would stick around and settle, but I don't. If you don't look at the cali girls other parts and just look them in their eyes here and there (normal) they get uncomfortable. They make me uncomfortable. The dudes are the same in a lot of ways? I would like to put a few in an arm lock for a while to give them a dose. That is true with half of them anyway. Strange people. Strangest place I have ever been. I can't figure out what is going on with them? And they live in their own superior liberal hypocrisy. Good standing grounds for cutting the throat of an infant beast is all I can say.

[will]

Update, it is now Legalized. Veto failed. 4 states in the U.S. Now legalize Homosexual Marriage.

[AussieOi]

then does anyone know why the church got involved in california but not in other states?

[Blip]

then does anyone know why the church got involved in california but not in other states?

No, nobody exactly knows you freakin apostate. Why don't you write them a letter...Oh, you know more than them..I forgot. Don't you have some American flags to burn?

While I am at it. You remind me of those hypocritical Calis I ran across with your no life experience sun bathing liberal hypocritical lawn chair attitude. You would fit right in with them. Your lawn chair is your throne as you look upon those American peasants With your vast knowledge. We are the best......read it and deal with it.

Your ask a question for a question tactic SUCKS. "please explain". "please go on". But that is all you got is a little intellect that you use. But you won't even have that talent when it is all said and done.

I got a prediction for you. I will be gone for 2 years or more and I will view this site after for fun. You will still be on it trying to change the things in the world you can't and casting your fallings on the "American" or something else. You will still be the habitual miserable you and the world and people will pass you by as you look for another victim of your superior intellect to cast responsibility on. Will it be a boyscout next? You have called me a child many times. I am passing what you deliver. Go look in the mirror and grow up would you. I know a coward when I smell one and you are it.

Freakin apostate. No loyalties...................

[AussieOi]

you know blip some days i get you and some days i dont. some recent posts were half alright

and then this? its pretty strong language to call a person a coward or a LDS an apostate you know.

what gives bro? where'd this come from?

[drjme]

you know blip some days i get you and some days i dont. some recent posts were half alright

and then this? its pretty strong language to call a person a coward or a LDS an apostate you know.

what gives bro? where'd this come from?

Ease up blip, writing stuff like that is just random.

[jbalm]

To try to answer Aussie,

In Iowa, their Supreme Court made the decision. There isn't any campaigning to be done in that instance.

Vermont did theirs kind of quickly, and without much fanfare. There really was no campaigning (on either side) to be done--at least not any high profile, drawn out campaigning. Vermont has been leaning this way for years anyway. According to my understanding, they already did "civil unions." "Gay marriage" was really nothing more than a change in terminology.

Also, California has a huge LDS population, making an effective force for campaigning in that state. Vermont doesn't have anywhere near as many LDS.

In short, when there is opportunity for opinions to be heard, the church will opine. The church will take part in campaigns, but seldom, if ever, starts them.

[jbalm]

Now we can put a face with the name:

[will]

Blip, it's hateful responses such as yours that make stay away from this and other forums. I do not find it humorous, I find it distasteful and full of pure hatered. Is this how the Savior would respond?

[LukeAir2008]

[Blip]

you know blip some days i get you and some days i dont. some recent posts were half alright

and then this? its pretty strong language to call a person a coward or a LDS an apostate you know.

what gives bro? where'd this come from?

Aus, I just don't like you.

[Col. Flagg]

you know blip some days i get you and some days i dont. some recent posts were half alright

and then this? its pretty strong language to call a person a coward or a LDS an apostate you know.

what gives bro? where'd this come from?

Aus, I just don't like you.

Blip, he's a good guy and I think many, if not the majority of his posts, ask legitimate questions and express genuine concerns. He's not here to simply 'ruffle feathers' or cause trouble... he's a good man fighting against evil like the rest of us. Besides... haven't we been counseled to love your enemies anyway?

[SAM]

To try to answer Aussie,

In Iowa, their Supreme Court made the decision. There isn't any campaigning to be done in that instance.

Vermont did theirs kind of quickly, and without much fanfare. There really was no campaigning (on either side) to be done--at least not any high profile, drawn out campaigning. Vermont has been leaning this way for years anyway. According to my understanding, they already did "civil unions." "Gay marriage" was really nothing more than a change in terminology.

Also, California has a huge LDS population, making an effective force for campaigning in that state. Vermont doesn't have anywhere near as many LDS.

In short, when there is opportunity for opinions to be heard, the church will opine. The church will take part in campaigns, but seldom, if ever, starts them.

I agree that there was very little for the public to do regarding the recent rulings on gay marriage in Iowa and Vermont, but how come there wasn't more activity from the church in Arizona or Florida, where similar ballot measures were considered? Arizona has a very large LDS population as well.

[Jonathan_H]

To try to answer Aussie,

In Iowa, their Supreme Court made the decision. There isn't any campaigning to be done in that instance.

(I live in Iowa)
Actually, I think the situation in Iowa is similar to the situation in California:
Iowa and California passed marriage laws.
Then the states' supreme courts ruled that these laws violated the states' constitutions.
The next step is to amend the state constitution, which is what happened in California (prop 8).

Unless the California supreme court rules that this amendment violates... something (I'm not sure what they would decide it violates, fundamental rights?) or unless federal law, ruling, or amendment overrides the state, then it is finished (short of more amending).

In Iowa (and Vermont I think), the next step is to attempt to amend the state constitutions. In Iowa Unfortunately, both the governor and senate majority leader are unwilling to begin debate of an amendment. So unless they change their minds or leave office, there is nothing that can be done. One interesting fact is that they were both in favor of the marriage law that was just overturned, but have now changed course. The senate majority leader said that his 20 year old daughter swayed him.

As for what efforts are being launched by the Church, we were asked by stake leaders this week to send letters voicing concern over the court ruling and a desire for a constitutional amendment. However, until there is an amendment on a ballet for which to campaign, I don't think we could see anything similar to the prop 8 situation.

As an aside, I think that this is a shocking development for most Iowans. I have only been here two years, but I would say that most people espouse traditional family values, and don't support what the supreme court has done.

~Jon

[AussieOi]

To try to answer Aussie,

In Iowa, their Supreme Court made the decision. There isn't any campaigning to be done in that instance.

(I live in Iowa)
Actually, I think the situation in Iowa is similar to the situation in California:
Iowa and California passed marriage laws.
Then the states' supreme courts ruled that these laws violated the states' constitutions.
The next step is to amend the state constitution, which is what happened in California (prop 8).

Unless the California supreme court rules that this amendment violates... something (I'm not sure what they would decide it violates, fundamental rights?) or unless federal law, ruling, or amendment overrides the state, then it is finished (short of more amending).

In Iowa (and Vermont I think), the next step is to attempt to amend the state constitutions. In Iowa Unfortunately, both the governor and senate majority leader are unwilling to begin debate of an amendment. So unless they change their minds or leave office, there is nothing that can be done. One interesting fact is that they were both in favor of the marriage law that was just overturned, but have now changed course. The senate majority leader said that his 20 year old daughter swayed him.

As for what efforts are being launched by the Church, we were asked by stake leaders this week to send letters voicing concern over the court ruling and a desire for a constitutional amendment. However, until there is an amendment on a ballet for which to campaign, I don't think we could see anything similar to the prop 8 situation.

As an aside, I think that this is a shocking development for most Iowans. I have only been here two years, but I would say that most people espouse traditional family values, and don't support what the supreme court has done.

~Jon

thanks for your reply, and don't worry about blip Flagg. he has up and down days like we all do.

i dont think the church got involved in calif, my understanding is they encouraged members to get involved. what was the example some brethren used? something about some battle in your revolutionary war early on?

i think i am just disappointed that it appears members are rolling over in their own states, maybe they aren't.

we have the proclomation, we know what to do. its up to us

what am i doing about it is the question i guess

[ithink]

then does anyone know why the church got involved in california but not in other states?

No, nobody exactly knows you freakin apostate. Why don't you write them a letter...Oh, you know more than them..I forgot. Don't you have some American flags to burn?

While I am at it. You remind me of those hypocritical Calis I ran across with your no life experience sun bathing liberal hypocritical lawn chair attitude. You would fit right in with them. Your lawn chair is your throne as you look upon those American peasants With your vast knowledge. We are the best......read it and deal with it.

Your ask a question for a question tactic SUCKS. "please explain". "please go on". But that is all you got is a little intellect that you use. But you won't even have that talent when it is all said and done.

I got a prediction for you. I will be gone for 2 years or more and I will view this site after for fun. You will still be on it trying to change the things in the world you can't and casting your fallings on the "American" or something else. You will still be the habitual miserable you and the world and people will pass you by as you look for another victim of your superior intellect to cast responsibility on. Will it be a boyscout next? You have called me a child many times. I am passing what you deliver. Go look in the mirror and grow up would you. I know a coward when I smell one and you are it.

Freakin apostate. No loyalties...................

See my signature.

[HeirofNumenor]

AussieOi wrote:
then does anyone know why the church got involved in california but not in other states?

The November 2008 election had 3 states ban gay marriage: California, Arizona, and Florida. All three have sizable LDS populations, with Cali's being by far the largest, and AZ's a higher percentage of the state population. I'm sure all three state' had their LDS congregations instructed to fight to ban gay marriage/ save traditional marriage, just Cali got the limelight, as in 99-2000 when Prop 22 when Pres. Hinckley said it was the duty of the LDS members to pass Prop 22. The Church was heavily involved in other states passing male-female only marriage since 1995, when the LDS and Catholics joined forces in Hawaii. They instructed members to fight for similar laws in Nevada in 2000, Alaska, recently, and many other states. Cali gets the publicity, because as stated many times even in GC, California is a bell-weather state. Or popularly "as Cali goes, so goes the nation."

[AussieOi]

AussieOi wrote:
then does anyone know why the church got involved in california but not in other states?

The November 2008 election had 3 states ban gay marriage: California, Arizona, and Florida. All three have sizable LDS populations, with Cali's being by far the largest, and AZ's a higher percentage of the state population. I'm sure all three state' had their LDS congregations instructed to fight to ban gay marriage/ save traditional marriage, just Cali got the limelight, as in 99-2000 when Prop 22 when Pres. Hinckley said it was the duty of the LDS members to pass Prop 22. The Church was heavily involved in other states passing male-female only marriage since 1995, when the LDS and Catholics joined forces in Hawaii. They instructed members to fight for similar laws in Nevada in 2000, Alaska, recently, and many other states. Cali gets the publicity, because as stated many times even in GC, California is a bell-weather state. Or popularly "as Cali goes, so goes the nation."

thanks
is it an indictment on us as members that we only take up a fight when other LDS are taking it up, and when we think the brethren are instructing us?

or is that rhetorical/ apparent?

can that change? does it start with people like us?

[hedgehog]

(just a few thoughts)
I also have wondered why California got the lion share of attention. It was a vote by the people the others we have been discussing i think have not been. I dont think any members were excommunicated for voting against it.

Also other western countries have had gay marriage for decades with no large judgments yet arriving. I wonder though if we US because of our blessings wont be held to higher standard.

In terms of the Temple and the government calling it discrimination not to perform gay marriages. IMO this may be the largest nearterm threat to the church. But I wonder what if we flipped the current situation to how i think it is actually in many countries. Where temple marriages do not count for civil marriages. Hence members must get "courthouse" married and then attend a sealing ceremony at the temple but one that does not carry legal marriage. Hence noone can sue to be temple married. Could this be a way of avoiding a massive conflict just with a policy shift. I believe other countries that don't recognize temple marriages already do things this way.

[AussieOi]

(just a few thoughts)
I also have wondered why California got the lion share of attention. It was a vote by the people the others we have been discussing i think have not been. I dont think any members were excommunicated for voting against it.

Also other western countries have had gay marriage for decades with no large judgments yet arriving. I wonder though if we US because of our blessings wont be held to higher standard.

In terms of the Temple and the government calling it discrimination not to perform gay marriages. IMO this may be the largest nearterm threat to the church. But I wonder what if we flipped the current situation to how i think it is actually in many countries. Where temple marriages do not count for civil marriages. Hence members must get "courthouse" married and then attend a sealing ceremony at the temple but one that does not carry legal marriage. Hence noone can sue to be temple married. Could this be a way of avoiding a massive conflict just with a policy shift. I believe other countries that don't recognize temple marriages already do things this way.

Finally someone pieces it together
All this persecution for the church which “Must” perform gay marriages in the temple meaning we’ll be shut down.
We let these people “marry” here in Oz.
No one cares.
They are still freakshows.
They’ll never be properly recognised.
They all die eventually and have nothing to show for their lifestyle
And has our church been shut down? No.
And lets not forget, why on earth would they want to get married in one of our temples?
Even our churches. We have no legal obligation to perform a marriage for anyone.
The local church up the road didn’t marry a mate cos he had to go to 6 Sunday services first.
All you do is say yeah we’ll do it but you have to be baptised, a full tithe payer, attend church for 12 months.
etc

[DOZ]

AussieOi wrote:
then does anyone know why the church got involved in california but not in other states?

The November 2008 election had 3 states ban gay marriage: California, Arizona, and Florida. All three have sizable LDS populations, with Cali's being by far the largest, and AZ's a higher percentage of the state population. I'm sure all three state' had their LDS congregations instructed to fight to ban gay marriage/ save traditional marriage, just Cali got the limelight, as in 99-2000 when Prop 22 when Pres. Hinckley said it was the duty of the LDS members to pass Prop 22. The Church was heavily involved in other states passing male-female only marriage since 1995, when the LDS and Catholics joined forces in Hawaii. They instructed members to fight for similar laws in Nevada in 2000, Alaska, recently, and many other states. Cali gets the publicity, because as stated many times even in GC, California is a bell-weather state. Or popularly "as Cali goes, so goes the nation."

WOW! thank you for sharing that knowledge with us. I had no idea.
I just am so thankful for people who have knowledge and share