The Debate on Proposition 8

The debate on Proposition 8, the California Marriage Protection Act, is everywhere. As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I support this amendment and have strong feelings about this important issue.

I believe that marriage should be defined and sanctioned by government as a union between one man and one woman. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God. Homosexual behavior, including gay marriage, transgresses the laws of God.

Advocates of gay marriage, including many in the news media, want you to believe that granting marriage certificates to gays will affect gays only.

Here is a common argument of gay marriage advocates, illustrated in this recent interview:

“PUBLIC AFFAIRS: … ‘Okay. Latter-day Saints are entitled to believe whatever they like. If you don’t believe in same-gender marriages, then it’s fine for you. But why try to regulate the behavior of other people who have nothing to do with your faith, especially when some nations in Europe have legally sanctioned that kind of marriage? Why not just say, ‘We don’t agree with it doctrinally for our own people’ and leave it at that. Why fight to get a Constitutional amendment [in the United States], for example?”

LDS church leaders Elder Lance B. Wickman and Elder Dallin H. Oaks answered:

“ELDER WICKMAN: We’re not trying to regulate people, but this notion that ‘what happens in your house doesn’t affect what happens in my house’ on the subject of the institution of marriage may be the ultimate sophistry of those advocating same-gender marriage.

Some people promote the idea that there can be two marriages, co-existing side by side, one heterosexual and one homosexual, without any adverse consequences. The hard reality is that, as an institution, marriage like all other institutions can only have one definition without changing the very character of the institution. Hence there can be no coexistence of two marriages. Either there is marriage as it is now defined and as defined by the Lord, or there is what could thus be described as genderless marriage. The latter is abhorrent to God, who, as we’ve been discussing, Himself described what marriage is — between a man and a woman.

A redefinition of that institution, therefore, redefines it for everyone — not just those who are seeking to have a so-called same gender marriage. It also ignores the definition that the Lord Himself has given.

ELDER OAKS: There’s another point that can be made on this. Let’s not forget that for thousands of years the institution of marriage has been between a man and a woman. Until quite recently, in a limited number of countries, there has been no such thing as a marriage between persons of the same gender. Suddenly we are faced with the claim that thousands of years of human experience should be set aside because we should not discriminate in relation to the institution of marriage. When that claim is made, the burden of proving that this step will not undo the wisdom and stability of millennia of experience lies on those who would make the change. Yet the question is asked and the matter is put forward as if those who believe in marriage between a man and a woman have the burden of proving that it should not be extended to some other set of conditions. “

The truth of the matter is that this amendment affects everyone. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God as the fundamental unit of society. Gay marriage is contrary to God's plan for the eternal destiny and happiness of the human family. Granting marriages to gays will inevitably lead to the disintegration of the family and of society.

If you are a California resident, please protect traditional marriages and families by voting YES on Proposition 8 this November.

Here is the amendment:

LIMIT ON MARRIAGE. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: The measure would have no fiscal effect on state or local governments. This is because there would be no change to the manner in which marriages are currently recognized by the state. (Initiative 07-0068.)

To read more about the California Marriage Protection Act, visit www.protectmarriage.com.

For the full interview with Elder Wickman and Oaks, visit the lds newsroom at www.newsroom.lds.org