Message from the Directors
July 2008
In California, The Choice Is Ours To Make
By ddaG nhoJ, North Star President
Introduction and Background
As many of you know, the California State Supreme Court recently overturned a March 2000 ban on same-sex marriage. What this basically means is that the California Supreme Court believes that two people of the same sex should be granted the right to marry, not just have a "civil union" or a "domestic partnership," but to actually marry and be afforded all the rights and privileges associated with marriage. Chief Justice Ronald M. George, writing for the majority opinion, states that laws that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation should be viewed in the same light as any laws that discriminate against race or gender.1 The court believes that the law confining marriage to mixed-gender couples constitutes illegal discrimination, and therefore overturned it. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says he supports the Court's decision2, even though he personally believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. The judges in this case who disagreed with the majority wrote that it should be up to the people (or the legislature) to decide how to best handle this issue.3
At the same time the Court handed down its decision, New York Governor David A. Patterson instructed all government agencies within New York State to recognize same-sex marriages performed outside of New York state. His executive order states that same-sex marriages performed in other states "should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union."4
The gay community hails the decisions in California and New York as major victories for equality. Human Rights Campaign President, Joe Solmonese, said in a statement:
"This is a historic day for the state of California, and a long-awaited day for the plaintiffs in this case and their families. The California Supreme Court has made clear that same-sex couples in committed relationships and their families deserve the same level of respect afforded to opposite-sex couples. The court did its job by ensuring that the state constitution provides the same rights and protections for everyone. This is a decision that strengthens California families."5
Dr. James Dobson, Chairman of Focus on the Family, disagreed with the court's decision and said in a statement:
"In 1863, Abraham Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address that ours is a government 'of the people, by the people and for the people.' Well, not in the state of California, where four imperious and unelected justices have just overridden the will of the voters. In 2000, Proposition 22 defined marriage as being exclusively between one man and one woman; the initiative passed by an overwhelming margin of 61 to 39 percent. That emphatic expression of the will of the people has now arrogantly been declared null and void. "In so doing, the justices have undermined and endangered the basic building block of society, which has been honored and preserved in every nation on earth through most of human history. What an outrage. It will be up to the people of California to preserve traditional marriage by passing a constitutional amendment in the November elections. Only then can they protect themselves from this latest example of judicial tyranny."6
In the weeks since the decision was handed down, hundreds of same-sex marriage licenses have been issued in California.7 Many same-sex wedding ceremonies have since been performed.8
A coalition of churches and organizations -- some of them LDS-affiliated -- and other concerned citizens who have united under the name "Protect Marriage" have produced the names and signatures of an estimated 1.1 million Californians asking the state to put on the ballot in November a question to amend the state's Constitution so that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."9 This effort began before the Court delivered its opinion but was organized in anticipation of a ruling striking down Proposition 22. These people feel that the Court usurped its authority by overturning Proposition 2210 from March 2000 and want the people of California, not the courts, to decide whether the earlier definition of marriage should be restored. If the November ballot measure passes, the California Constitution -- the fundamental law of the state -- would be amended to define marriage as between one man and one woman. This would effectively decide, once and for all, whether or not two people of the same sex should be allowed to marry in the state of California.
Today, from pulpits in LDS meeting houses throughout California, a letter signed by the First Presidency of the Church was read aloud which states that the Church will officially participate with this coalition in seeking passage of the November referendum, and it calls upon church members to actively become involved in supporting the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of their means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman.
North Star fully recognizes the potential effects this issue may have on many of our members, their families, and those leaders who refer to us and our experience for counsel on dealing with issues related to homosexuality. The next nineteen weeks may bring out the best in most Latter-day Saints and the worst in others. It is our prayer that by working together, looking toward Christ as our example, and honestly seeking to empathize with and understand all sides of this potentially contentious societal issue rather than relying on prejudices and biases to guide us, we might more fully allow the spirit of Christ and the Holy Ghost to unify us as the brothers and sisters we are. Rather than seeing this as an issue that creates division, we see this as an opportunity for each of us to educate ourselves and learn to practice humility, patience, and compassion. If we do this collectively as a church community, we will help fulfill two of the three parts of the "grand mission"11 of the church: namely, proclaiming the gospel, and perfecting the saints.
Understanding begins by seeing things from another point of view. We offer two here, by no means complete, but hopefully somewhat representative.
One Possible Gay LDS Perspective
Joseph was born and raised in the LDS Church. His parents were sealed in the St. George Temple before he was born. Joseph loved Primary, especially the beautiful songs they sung. In Junior High and High School, Joseph was extremely popular and enjoyed "group dating" when he turned 16. He loved being with his friends. Joseph received his Eagle Scout Award during his teenage years and managed to save one thousand dollars on his own for his mission. Joseph served a faithful mission where he blessed the lives of countless people.
When Joseph returned home from his mission, he enrolled in a university where he majored in biology in preparation for medical school. Joseph had always loved helping people, particularly those who were underprivileged and in dire need of help, and he chose to pursue a career in medicine.
For the first two years following his mission, Joseph attended his Sunday meetings regularly. He attended the temple regularly. Joseph's patriarchal blessing told him he would marry a "daughter of Zion," but the idea of marriage seemed very foreign to him: unnatural, uncomfortable, as if it went against his own personal grain. Joseph gave lessons in his elders quorum on the importance of raising a happy, healthy family and bore his testimony that this was a true principle. But deep inside, he felt that this principle was better suited to other LDS men.
With time, Joseph began to feel anxiety at church and around LDS people whenever they would ask, "Joseph, are you dating anyone?" or, "Joseph, when are you getting married?" These questions pained Joseph a great deal, but he would laugh them off by stating, "I'm too busy with school right now to think about that," or, "I haven't met the right person yet." Joseph knew that people who asked him these questions meant well, but he secretly wished they would just mind their own business.
Joseph, for the first time in his life, was struggling with his attraction to other men. He didn't consider himself "gay" because that whole lifestyle - that whole concept - was completely foreign to him. Whenever his mind would entertain the idea that perhaps he was "gay," he would quickly shut down the thought and concentrate on other things. Perhaps these thoughts entered his mind because he wasn't good enough - not worthy enough.
To make these thoughts and feelings go away, he would do the things his Mission President, and Primary Teachers, Bishops, Scout Leaders, and Parents had taught him to do. He would pray more diligently. He would pay more tithing. He would fast more often. He would attend the temple more frequently. He would be the best Latter-day Saint ever, and surely these feelings would go away.
But they didn't go away. They only intensified within him. Joseph was a good person. A beautiful person. A highly gifted and talented person. He was also attracted to other men and doing his best to cope with this emerging reality on his own.
As years went by, Joseph grew tired of living two different lives. He grew weary of hiding his true self from those he loved. He grew tired of hearing how people like him were judged as "bad" or "evil" because he knew deep inside that he was a good person. He knew that he hadn't consciously chosen these feelings, and he knew that many active LDS people judged people like him without really understanding what he, and they, were feeling. So, after a tormenting and lengthy personal struggle, Joseph decided he would feel more peace by associating with people who understood his situation than he would by remaining active in the LDS Church. "Men are that they might have joy..."12 and he wanted to feel joy in his life. He wanted to feel happiness in this lifetime, even if that meant waiting until the next life when he and God would sit, as Father and Son, and "reason together" through this issue.
Joseph longed for the day when he could reconcile his inner feelings of wanting love, affection, and validation from another man with his desire to always do the right thing and be one of Christ's disciples.
By the time Joseph was in his late twenties, he began to find hope in the possibility that he might be able to reconcile these two sides of him by actually marrying another man. If the state would allow him to marry, then he and his life partner could raise the children they had always wanted. Joseph could be a father. They could pray together as a family. They could hold Family Home Evening. They could eat dinner together. They could have a family photo taken and placed on the wall above the fireplace just as his parents had done at their home. Joseph would finally feel validated in his deepest desires rather than made to feel shame because of them. And even though Joseph's family might not be an eternal family as the Primary song had always taught, knowing that he could have "home" here on earth, during his mortal existence, brought Joseph to tears. This decision by the California Supreme Court felt like emancipation for Joseph. America was a blessed land, because finally, here, he could fulfill his life's dream and potential.
When Joseph heard from his family that the letter was read today in Sacrament Meeting, he immediately received the impression that this may not be a good thing. Why is the Church joining a coalition of other Churches regarding a political issue now when it has generally refused to do so in the past? And what about all the churches that support same-sex marriage?13 Why is the Church becoming involved in a political issue when he had always been taught that the Church stays out of politics?14 If the Church is so "pro-family," then why would it deny orphans or unwanted children the opportunity of being reared, cared for, and raised in a loving, supportive family? Surely this is political posturing rather than revelation from our Father in Heaven, because our Heavenly Father would never encourage us to fight one another. Joseph knows -- he has a testimony -- that to raise children in a home where both parents are actively involved and care deeply for their children actually fulfills part of God's plan.
One Possible Straight LDS Perspective
It had been twelve years since Emily's divorce, and raising two kids on her own is the most difficult thing she has ever done. Since her ex-husband pays little or no child support, she is deeply in debt. Thankfully, the Ward Fast Offering fund buys most of her groceries and pays her utilities. She hasn't purchased a new dress or shoes for herself in more than six years. The water heater has a slow leak, and the roof desperately needs to be replaced. And with the price of gas being what it is, she fills the tank only to half, and quietly prays that it will last her through the week. Then she quietly says another prayer asking Heavenly Father to prevent her from getting laid off from her job. Then, she nearly breaks down - but forces back the tears and puts on a smile.
Even though his friends all have their own car, Emily's 16-year-old son has to ride his bicycle to and from his first job as a stock boy at the local grocery store. He knows that times are tough and secretly puts part of his pay back in his Mom's purse. When Emily gives her 16-year-old a few dollars to spend at school, he refuses and opts to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich at home instead.
Emily's 14-year-old, however, doesn't quite understand what is going on. He's more rebellious than the 16-year-old and argues a lot with his mother. Unintentionally, he says hurtful things like, "Mom, why can't we have neat stuff like Tony's family?" and, "Mom, why can't I have my own room?" and, "Mom, why do I have to do the dishes tonight? Why can't you just do them?" The 14-year-old doesn't realize that by the end of the day, his mother is completely exhausted and emotionally drained. The simple act of clearing the dishes without complaining would mean so much to her. It would be a small act of emotional support that could keep her going for another day.
Thank goodness for the Relief Society and the LDS Church. Without the support Emily receives from the people in her California ward, she feels she would have to give up. She simply couldn't do it anymore. If it weren't for her home teachers, who faithfully show up every month and whenever she needs them, she would have no Melchizedek priesthood in her home. She will ask them next time if they could possibly help out with the leaky water heater. If it weren't for the phone calls and visits of love and encouragement she receives from her Relief Society sisters, she would feel completely alone in her challenges. If it weren't for the bishopric who sees fit to help her financially, she simply couldn't make it. And if it weren't for the faith she has in Heavenly Father, life would be pointless.
Emily thanks Heavenly Father at night for the Church. She thanks Him for her membership in it. She thanks Him for the opportunities it gives her to serve and to receive service. Emily recognizes that membership in the LDS Church is her single best hope for fulfilling her life dream: to raise two beautiful sons, send them on missions, see them gain an education, marry in the temple, and eventually achieve a better life for their own families than she has been able to provide for them.
Emily has a deep testimony in the power of revelation, both Personal and Prophetic. Emily has spent most of her adult life in the service of her two sons, and knowing that the father of her sons has been absent for most of their lives, she worries constantly that outside influences might draw her sons away from the gospel. How could she bear the pain of seeing her sons become attracted to or even choose a lifestyle that she feels will not be of benefit to them long-term? Time for another silent prayer...
When the letter was read today in sacrament meeting, Emily immediately received the impression that this is a good thing. Joining this cause will help further her life dream. This is revelation from Heavenly Father. Emily knows that her boys would not be as "high risk" as they are had they only been raised in a loving father/mother-centered household. Emily feels in her heart -- she has a testimony -- that to raise children in a home where both parents are male or both parents are female will create more long-term challenges of identity for the children than it will healthy opportunities.
So Now What?
Some of the rhetoric from both sides of the issue would have the average reader believe that a war is brewing. The Equality for All website states: "The moment has arrived. The battle is on."15 And James Dobson, Chairman of Focus on the Family, states in this month's newsletter: "The battle may not be over."16 Polls have been contradictory, some of them showing the question is very close, others showing the proposed amendment either winning or losing by a wide margin.
The reason this issue is so important is because we're talking about California. And regardless of what you personally think of California, or Californians, it is arguably the most populous and most powerful state in the country. California has, by far, the largest economy in the country (one of the top ten economies in the world), and the California State Supreme Court is arguably the most respected in the nation17 - meaning that the supreme courts of other states might copy its actions and decisions. Many people, including San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, believe that "as goes California, so goes the nation."18 In short, this is a biggie. Even "revolutionary."19 This is obviously why the Church has decided to become involved.
Nobody knows what the final ballot count will be in November. But this we know for sure today: the ways in which Latter-day Saints comport themselves while addressing this issue will have major impact on other Latter-day Saints and their families all over the world. This may be a California-based political issue, but rest assured it will have national and global implications.
Regardless of how each of us may vote, the choice is ours to make, individually. Will our words and actions during discussions and debates in our churches and homes hurt and degrade our brothers and sisters? Or will we choose, during this potentially divisive and heated debate, to take the higher road and help edify and understand one another?
Sincerely,
ddaG nhoJ, President
[7] California County by County Tally of Same Sex Marriage Licenses
[12] 2 Ne 2:25
[13] Groups Join Gay Marriage Fight, Equality For All Coalition
[15] EqualityForAll.com
[18] Marriage ruling a Victory for Newsom, San Francisco Chronicle, 16 May, 2008
[19] Ibid.