Abomination of Desolation and a Little Fig Tree

Before you try to read into what I'm about to say, and boil my words down to a "HATEZ TEH GAYZ," I'm going to fully admit that my words are about the legal ratification of gay relationships (vis a vis gay marriage) BUT that they are about much, much more than that. Most of you who read this will call me a bigot, insist that my opinions come from hatred, and soon (once you have power to do so) you will probably physically revile and attack me and my family.

So be it. I hope that when the time comes, I will be able to face it with courage and kindness.

For a long time, I have been fairly silent on the subject of gay marriage/civil unions. I probably will be again, once I've posted this. The only chance I had to vote on it so far, I voted to support gay marriage/civil unions. But my opinions have changed since then, and I become more sadly convinced of them as time goes on. My opinions haven't changed because of gay marriage, or gays, or aversion to homosexual attraction. They have changed because I've been taught of a much larger picture of the role of religious beliefs in a public sphere, and it is that larger picture I wish to address.

Some People Oppose Gay Marriage

There is a point at which argument is futile. When two sides of a disagreement are so firmly rooted in their own perceptions, and those perceptions are coming from intrinsically different structures, there is not enough common ground for discussion.

This is, perhaps, why I haven’t really addressed the gay marriage battles going on in the United States of America since they started. I have listened to both sides, found fault and good with both, and made my conclusions. And most of the time, when I try to share why I believe the way I do, I only invite attack.

I do wish to state, perhaps for my own benefit alone, that I do not support gay marriage. I used to, before I started blogging. Getting involved in blogs certainly catalyzed some of my change of mind. I’m sure there are many out there who discount my opinions because they assume they are solely religiously based, or because they come from a place of ignorance and fear. I can protest as much as I like, but I’m not likely to change the minds of people so unapologetically closed-minded. I’m not even going to bother.

There is much I could say about gaining respect for differing moral stances. The arguments for gay marriage are generally based on the moral structure of secularism, the arguments against gay marriage are generally based on a moral structure espoused by many religions of the world. I believe that “separation of Church and State” in our country was never meant to restrict moral opinions from the public sphere. In fact, I believe that creating a space where individuals can act according to their morality in a public sphere without fear of losing employment, housing, physical safety, the ability to reasonably conduct business according to their conscience, and relative peace in their private lives was a core point of our government.

And, like it or not, the bulk of efforts to remove that freedom from fear is coming from those who think secularly. Many believe that individuals should have no right to exercise religiously-based morality in a public sphere, but ought to be forced to behave according to secular morality.

I would fight—have fought—equally hard to defend a gay person’s right to behave according to their beliefs in a public sphere as I now defend my own. I would shop at a store owned by a gay person. I'm as likely to design a gay friend's wedding invitations as those for a straight friend, were one to ask me. But I believe that the right to behave a certain way is not the same as a right to be publicly supported for it.

Determination of the lines of law—deciding what the public should pay for, support, and condone by law—should only be legally determined by a slow and cautious approach to lawmaking, including ALL the branches of government. Rushing headlong, deliberately bypassing checks and balances in the legal system, will inevitably reap consequences in unexpected directions.

I am afraid, watching the way law is happening now. And even if you support gay marriage, you should be afraid, too. The rate at which individual freedom to act according to personal moral conscience is being denied is frightening. When legal paths have been opened, they are very difficult to close. Almost overnight, changes are being made that alter the way people are allowed to live their lives. Though that may work in your favor today, there are no guarantees for tomorrow.

I do not know if my feelings on gay marriage will soon rob me of my ability to act according to my conscience in my employment. My line of work makes me one of those who could easily be forced to participate in things I find reprehensible. I wish, even if gay marriage wins wholesale, that those of religious moral conscience will be able to win a space for themselves. Not only to protect religious institutions, but to protect religious people.

Make no mistake. This war is not just about gay marriage. It is much more fundamental than that. It is a war between religion and secularism, a clash of whether or not people will be allowed to act according to a religious source of morality. Whether or not their votes will be taken away. Whether or not they can choose to conduct their business as they believe they should. Whether or not they are allowed to raise their children in the faith they hold dear. Whether or not they are allowed to speak their hearts, or must remain silent for fear of dire consequence.

There are many voices of empty reassurance, claiming that such things could never happen. But they are already happening. People claimed that welfare for single moms wouldn't result in more single moms, that loosening divorce laws wouldn't result in more divorces. They are blind to the lessons of history, and ignorant to human nature.

Some rights cannot be granted without robbing the rights of another. You can't give the right to drink and drive without potentially robbing a drunk driver's victim of the right to life. You can't give gay people the right to demand the services they want from whom they want them without robbing the service provider of the right to sell their services to whomever they wish to sell them. There is always a price. Some ideals cannot be legislated without sacrificing other ideals.

I mourn for our country. Not because gay marriage is becoming legal, but because of the way that victory is being won and the intentions in the hearts of those who are winning it. Such desire to silence opposition exists everywhere, male and female, gay and straight, religious and secular, but when it is popular and celebrated—when it is in power—there is no one who will escape the price.

Yet, despite my sorrow for the sins of this world, I know in whom I trust. The Book of Mormon is now more than ever before an obvious warning to the righteous, a chance to prepare. We may be called to lay down our lives as so many before us have. But if we keep the love of God in our hearts even as the mobs mock and ridicule, we will have a rock of faith through the trials to come.

“O, ye nations of the earth, how often would I have gathered you together as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, but ye would not!

“How oft have I called upon you by the mouth of my servants, and by the ministering of angels, and by mine own voice, and by the voice of thunderings, and by the voice of lightnings, and by the voice of tempests, and by the voice of earthquakes, and great hailstorms, and by the voice of famines and pestilences of every kind, and by the great sound of a trump, and by the voice of judgment, and by the voice of mercy all the day long, and by the voice of glory and honor and the riches of eternal life, and would have saved you with an everlasting salvation, but ye would not!”
D&C 43:24-25

A Turbulent Heart

“The heart has reasons that reason cannot know.” —Blaise Pascall

There are times in a person's life when she is presented with opportunities to look at herself and find herself wanting. I am naturally very hard on myself. Growing up, I somehow learned that my worth was directly linked to perfection. It seems that relationships are the greatest of these opportunities.

Several years ago, I had the opportunity to live with my sister after her graduation from high school. We had not been the best of friends growing up. She was favored, and I was a truculent and sullen child. We did not have the enmity that many siblings cultivate, but we were jealous of each other for different reasons. I like to think that in the course of living together, and the trouble that we both experienced at the time, we learned to forgive and accept each other and ourselves a little bit more.

When I served my mission, I had close relationships with a few of my companions. One in particular, I think of as a sister. We had very similar outlooks on missionary work, and life in general. We both hated mushrooms (a good basis for any lasting friendship.) Most of all, she gave me confidence in myself and my unique brand of missionary work, which did not mesh well with the general missionary structure. Her influence started my feet down a long path which would eventually lead to me forgiving myself of my faults, no small task.

The Raise of the Right Hand

Some time ago, I became involved in a discussion involving the way local priesthood leadership was dealing with a particular issue. Though I disagreed, I believe I was offering constructive feedback as to why the approach was doing more harm than good. One of the main responses was along the lines, "this came from the bishopric, and they are our priesthood leaders with stewardship, therefore this is inspired by the Spirit," with the connotation that disagreement with the method is disagreement with God.

I have spent a great deal of thought on the nature of stewardship, priesthood authority, and agency. I think that many of us may have a faulty understanding of the nature of priesthood power, and what it means to sustain a person in their calling.

Voting for the Mob

After listening to a sickening quantity of debates, diatribes and declarations, carefully marking each better choice on my sample ballot, taking the cheat sheet down to the voting center and selecting each in turn, I found myself staring at the screen with a feeling vaguely reminiscent of trying to choose which of my children would die on the sacrificial altar of a God I don't believe in.

I have heard jokes and incredulity that there could still be undecided voters out there. How could anyone not know who they are voting for by now, after two years of inundation? But the concept didn't seem foreign or unbelievable to me. I was one. To be honest, although I voted several days ago, I still am one.

It sounds very defeatist, and I suppose it is, but I don't believe that any presidential candidate will do a good job as president. I don't believe that any of them can act as the figurehead of the modern world without leaving a sour taste in my mouth. Perhaps I am indecisive, but I cannot shake the feeling that a vote is an endorsement. I simply cannot endorse either of those people. Their behavior is juvenile, their pandering is nauseating, and I am left vaguely sickened and somewhat despairing in the knowledge that this is what the American people want in their politicians.

I know there is no way to find a president who will agree with me on every issue. That is not what I am asking. I want a leader for our country with some residue of integrity. I want someone who can say what he or she believes without having to simply tell people what they want to hear. I want a presidential race that is based on demonstrating one's own character, not on smearing the opponents or prattling about "the issues". Most of all, I want to live in a country where people are intelligent enough to look beyond what they think they believe, and see value in honesty and integrity.

I have no hope of any such country. That is why I am still carrying an unshakable heaviness of spirit. I feel rather lonely, despite knowing there are a few others who feel as I do.

I did finally choose. I prayed with all my faith that God would watch over His work and His righteousness, that my choice would not damage the things I feel He holds precious. I was left with the feeling that it would be alright. God is there, and He is still trying to gather those who will be gathered. I don't know who is going to win this election, but I know that I am ready to face the challenges that are sure to continue in my lifetime, whatever the outcome.

There may be no one I can endorse in this presidential election, but there are still people I can affect in my own life, and that makes all the difference.

Voting for the Kingmen

In reading the latest Gospel Doctrine lessons, I feel that I better understand how to vote and how to discern what to vote for. I think that many LDS members would vote differently, if they shone the light of the "war chapters" in Alma on current matters. Some interesting contrasts and parallels are drawn between the "good guys" (the freemen) and the "bad guys" (the kingmen) in these chapters.

Kingmen:	Freemen:	Common:
Change the law to support a king	Maintain a government which protects religious freedoms	Both believe they are maintaining the right to govern
Refuse to defend country	Willing to defend country, but take no pleasure in it	Both profess to desire peace
Seek for power and authority	Enforce defense of country only when granted by the voice of the people.	Willing to take up arms to fight for what they wanted
Contentious, proud, stubborn	Courageous, sober, kept commandments of God	Both believe they are in the right

These points are found from Alma 51 through the end of the book of Alma. There are other comparisons, but these are the thrust of my thoughts at the moment. I think when we look at who or what to vote for, we should keep these things in mind. Particularly, I find Ammoron's epistle in Alma 54 intriguing. He takes a stand of disingenuous innocence, claiming to be only defending his rights. Yet Moroni, knowing Ammoron, knows that he is not really in it to defend his rights, but to attack the Nephites in a bid for power. I feel there are political conflicts today where some may claim innocence, claim that they are only seeking for their own rights. Although some of those down the line may truly believe in the righteousness of their stance, those who began it and are heading it are fully cognizant of their fraud. They know they only desire power at the cost of the rights of others. It is up to us to pray for discernment: to see the cause which is defended by those truly defending those rights, liberties and freedoms which lead to eternal happiness and to God.

Pessimistic as I am, I believe there are few real defenders of righteousness in politics today. I have had the opportunity to speak face-to-face with a few who do. I wish more political candidates would take the time to cease posturing in front of the masses, and sit down in smaller groups to speak as frankly and honestly as they can. Some of those few I have spoken to have my voting loyalty, because I feel they will do their best to fight for the right causes when I cannot even know those causes are on the table, no matter what color party shirt they happen to wear.

Red Shirt, Blue Shirt, Old Shirt, New Shirt

I find the flurry of politics somewhat overwhelming. As if I am walking into a Hatfield/McCoy battleground, each side is screaming for me to "come and join us, WE are RIGHT!" Both sides have issues I agree with, both sides use tactics I do not like. I can't seem to decide, do I want to wear the Republican red shirt, or the Democratic blue?

When I proudly informed my father some time ago that I was independent of party, he told me I had to choose one or the other to make my vote count. "The real politics," he said, "happen in the primaries. If you don't declare a party, you get no vote in the primary." Each time I have voted and gone to fill in the little black bubble by one party or the other, something holds my hand. I can't commit, despite the benefits.

On top of that confusion lies the mystery of candidacy. I have yet to see a single presidential hopeful exhibit the slightest iota of moral accountability. How can I vote for someone whose main goal is simply power? They do not wish to serve the country, no matter what they say. In the eyes of each candidate lurks the fervor of competition.

"We have had no good president since Washington," is one of my favorite sayings. Why? "Because he is the only one who refused the job."