Template:Critical sources box:Mormonism and politics/California Proposition 8/CriticalSources - Revision history

GregSmith: GregSmith moved page Mormonism and politics/California Proposition 8/CriticalSources to Template:Critical sources box:Mormonism and politics/California Proposition 8/CriticalSources

2024-04-30T22:25:25Z

GregSmith moved page Mormonism and politics/California Proposition 8/CriticalSources to Template:Critical sources box:Mormonism and politics/California Proposition 8/CriticalSources

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:25, 30 April 2024
(No difference)

GregSmith at 22:24, 30 April 2024

2024-04-30T22:24:59Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==={{Criticism source label English}}===
+{{Critical sources box
 * Laura Compton, "Edits to Boyd K. Packer's Talk," ''mormonsformarriage.com'' (blog post) (8 October 2010; 16h38) <!--Quote is: How about, “The Mormon Church led the way in taking away those rights by providing the bulk of the grassroots leadership and volunteers, by soliciting and raising the most amount of money provided to the ProtectMarriage coalition, by supporting the groundwork to create a coalition in the first place, by facilitating leadership for traditional marriage coalitions in California for 20 years, by disseminating and not contradicting the less-than-accurate campaign bullet points, by advising in legal briefs both directly as an amicus curiae and indirectly as non-public reviewers of both briefs and pending legislation?”  And how about, “The Mormon Church did not hide the fact that it was involved in the campaign, but it did delay, postpone and minimize the full extent to which it was involved in trying to persuade its members to volunteer and donate money and by limiting its donations to non-monetary donations only so that it could truthfully tell the world, ‘We did not donate any money to the campaign.’?--> <!-- Also on 12 Oct 2010, 7h46: There were 18,000 same-sex couples legally married in California the summer of 2008.
@@ Line 5: / Line 10: @@
 What it did not need to do was pick a political committee with which to align, tell members about it, set fundraising goals for wards and stakes, call (even informally) members to supervise political campaign ZIP codes and regions, have general authorities make multiple personal fundraising conference calls to potential large donors, assign young single adults to spend specific numbers of hours blogging/texting/emailing - campaigning - each week, organize call banks and firesides for people with California connections, encourage pollwatching and precinct-walking, etc. We did not need church meetings taken over every week to discuss the evils of homosexuality and the threats to our own families if our gay neighbors wanted to create lasting pair-bonds. The only thing that kind of rhetoric did was fan the flames of fear, misunderstanding and battles, and it served to give free rein to those Mormons who felt the need to speak out derisively of GLBT people.-->

GregSmith at 23:25, 13 November 2010

2010-11-13T23:25:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:25, 13 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==={{Criticism source label English}}===		==={{Criticism source label English}}===
	* Laura Compton, "Edits to Boyd K. Packer's Talk," ''mormonsformarriage.com'' (blog post) (8 October 2010; 16h38) <!--Quote is: How about, “The Mormon Church led the way in taking away those rights by providing the bulk of the grassroots leadership and volunteers, by soliciting and raising the most amount of money provided to the ProtectMarriage coalition, by supporting the groundwork to create a coalition in the first place, by facilitating leadership for traditional marriage coalitions in California for 20 years, by disseminating and not contradicting the less-than-accurate campaign bullet points, by advising in legal briefs both directly as an amicus curiae and indirectly as non-public reviewers of both briefs and pending legislation?” And how about, “The Mormon Church did not hide the fact that it was involved in the campaign, but it did delay, postpone and minimize the full extent to which it was involved in trying to persuade its members to volunteer and donate money and by limiting its donations to non-monetary donations only so that it could truthfully tell the world, ‘We did not donate any money to the campaign.’?--> <!-- Also on 12 Oct 2010, 7h46 ~~-->~~ There were 18,000 same-sex couples legally married in California the summer of 2008.		* Laura Compton, "Edits to Boyd K. Packer's Talk," ''mormonsformarriage.com'' (blog post) (8 October 2010; 16h38) <!--Quote is: How about, “The Mormon Church led the way in taking away those rights by providing the bulk of the grassroots leadership and volunteers, by soliciting and raising the most amount of money provided to the ProtectMarriage coalition, by supporting the groundwork to create a coalition in the first place, by facilitating leadership for traditional marriage coalitions in California for 20 years, by disseminating and not contradicting the less-than-accurate campaign bullet points, by advising in legal briefs both directly as an amicus curiae and indirectly as non-public reviewers of both briefs and pending legislation?” And how about, “The Mormon Church did not hide the fact that it was involved in the campaign, but it did delay, postpone and minimize the full extent to which it was involved in trying to persuade its members to volunteer and donate money and by limiting its donations to non-monetary donations only so that it could truthfully tell the world, ‘We did not donate any money to the campaign.’?--> <!-- Also on 12 Oct 2010, 7h46: There were 18,000 same-sex couples legally married in California the summer of 2008.

	The Church could have done in Prop 8 what it did with the Federal DOMA legislation, or Canadian Same-Sex Marriage legislation, or Argentinian Same-Sex Marriage legislation, or Amendment 3 legislation in Utah: Send out a letter from the First Presidency telling members the legislation is coming up and urge members to express their opinions on the legislation/vote to their elected representatives/neighbors. It could have even done that multiple times during the election. They could have reminded members to register to vote. I personally wouldn’t have had any problem if they’d repeated some of the things done in the Prop 8 campaign: assigned each bishop to say a special prayer the Sunday before the election, create a website and provide content for that website (so long as the website used truthful, gospel-centered messages about marriage and was not paid for by tithing funds).		The Church could have done in Prop 8 what it did with the Federal DOMA legislation, or Canadian Same-Sex Marriage legislation, or Argentinian Same-Sex Marriage legislation, or Amendment 3 legislation in Utah: Send out a letter from the First Presidency telling members the legislation is coming up and urge members to express their opinions on the legislation/vote to their elected representatives/neighbors. It could have even done that multiple times during the election. They could have reminded members to register to vote. I personally wouldn’t have had any problem if they’d repeated some of the things done in the Prop 8 campaign: assigned each bishop to say a special prayer the Sunday before the election, create a website and provide content for that website (so long as the website used truthful, gospel-centered messages about marriage and was not paid for by tithing funds).

	What it did not need to do was pick a political committee with which to align, tell members about it, set fundraising goals for wards and stakes, call (even informally) members to supervise political campaign ZIP codes and regions, have general authorities make multiple personal fundraising conference calls to potential large donors, assign young single adults to spend specific numbers of hours blogging/texting/emailing - campaigning - each week, organize call banks and firesides for people with California connections, encourage pollwatching and precinct-walking, etc. We did not need church meetings taken over every week to discuss the evils of homosexuality and the threats to our own families if our gay neighbors wanted to create lasting pair-bonds. The only thing that kind of rhetoric did was fan the flames of fear, misunderstanding and battles, and it served to give free rein to those Mormons who felt the need to speak out derisively of GLBT people.-->		What it did not need to do was pick a political committee with which to align, tell members about it, set fundraising goals for wards and stakes, call (even informally) members to supervise political campaign ZIP codes and regions, have general authorities make multiple personal fundraising conference calls to potential large donors, assign young single adults to spend specific numbers of hours blogging/texting/emailing - campaigning - each week, organize call banks and firesides for people with California connections, encourage pollwatching and precinct-walking, etc. We did not need church meetings taken over every week to discuss the evils of homosexuality and the threats to our own families if our gay neighbors wanted to create lasting pair-bonds. The only thing that kind of rhetoric did was fan the flames of fear, misunderstanding and battles, and it served to give free rein to those Mormons who felt the need to speak out derisively of GLBT people.-->

GregSmith: Created page with "==={{Criticism source label English}}=== * Laura Compton, "Edits to Boyd K. Packer's Talk," ''mormonsformarriage.com'' (blog post) (8 October 2010; 16h38)