No on Proposition 8: Preserve Religious Freedoms

October 22, 2008 · Posted in Election 2008 

I’m sure the title of this post will have many churchgoers aghast, but I am deadly serious about it. Proposition 8 does far more harm to churches than it does any other institution, including marriage.

Despite the fact that this proposition made it to the ballot via petitions circulated among churches and heavily sponsored by the conservative church movements in this state (including the Mormon church), the truth of the matter is that the one single institution with the most to lose is the church itself.

In purely legal terms, marriage is a contract entered into by two parties. By applying for and receiving a marriage license and going through either a civil or church ceremony, that contract is sealed. Right now, churches have the absolute right to define the terms under which their clergy will perform a marriage ceremony.

But if Proposition 8 passes, Pandora’s box is flung open, as the barrier between church and state is shattered. Here is what Proposition 8 does: It sends a state mandate to churches telling them exactly what criteria they may consider in order to administer marriage. It clearly dictates doctrine on the question of marriage to the church.

Forget everything you’ve seen on TV; forget the red herring arguments (lies) about teaching children about gay marriage in second grade. Stand back and consider Proposition 8 from a distance.

Here is the authority the church will cede to the state if Proposition 8 passes:

  • Who it can marry
  • Who it can ordain
  • Who may attend church-sponsored schools and what those schools must teach
  • How tithes and offerings are spent

Don’t cluck your teeth and assume I’m the prophet of doom here. I’m not. If churches open the door for the state to dictate doctrine, churches also open the door for the state to dictate to them.

Think about that. As Steveaudio says:

In other words, the wall protects both sides. Did you forget that? Water flows both ways, and so does power. If you think you can control the Government, the Government can control you and your churches.

Oh, and in case you’re reading this and see the words I’ve written as those of a typical California liberal (which I am), let me share the thoughts of some Republicans who oppose Proposition 8:

Whether you are Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, Christian, Muslim, Jew, or atheist, Proposition 8 is bad for people, for religion, and for the state. Don’t let a narrow-minded bunch of homophobes knock down the wall between church and state.

Just vote no.

And visit NoOnProp8.com. Consider a donation. To protect your church’s right to make it’s own decisions, because that is really the bottom line.

(though I believe it’s also a mean-spirited and stupid idea to ban anyone from marrying…that’s my opinion. FACT is that churches put way too much at risk with this proposition)

Sphere: Related Content

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

  • gsp
    P.S. I might add, I think you are right on the church/state comments. However, I think you have it backwards.

    If Prop 8 fails, churches may be subject to lawsuits (already happened in Massachusetts where same-sex marriage is legal) if they do not want to marry same-sex couples, which is against Christian morals/values.

    Others have been sued and lost when same-sex couples have demanded services they are not able to provide based on their moral values (Dr., wedding photographer, Catholic Charities - adoption services, etc)

    The 'wall' that protects/separates Church and State is now up! If Prop 8 fails, that wall will come down and the damage caused will be of massive proportions! in MANY WAYS!
  • gsp
    I find this whole debate very interesting. I feel there are some very serious ramifications to our society if Prop 8 fails from a social/religious/moral standpoint.

    However, Prop 8 is about governing by the will of the people. Please watch this short YouTube video that illustrates the point.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zbpDe_QhS0

    I, too, am a Repbulican. I strongly believe in our Constitution and that the government is BY the people and fFOR the people.

    When Californian's voted in 2000 by 61% (Prop 22) to MAINTAIN marriage between a man and a woman, the voice of the people was spoken.

    Four State Supreme Court justices overturned this in June of 2008. This is the reason Prop 8 exists.

    Thankfully, we all have equal voice. We each get to express our views, whatever they are and for whatever reasons we hold them, when we enter the voting booth and cast our ballot.

    I believe in and cherish the freedoms we enjoy in this country and feel they need to be preserved!

    I also believe that Prop 8 - marriage between a man and a woman - is the bedrock of our society/human race and should be preserved for the benefit of our society now and future generations.

    We have laws against people marrying their brother/sister, mother/father/, uncles/aunts, and cousins etc. There is no discrimination in this. It is for the good of all, even if they 'love' each other.

    No Domestic Partnership rights will be lost to same-sex couples if Prop 8 passes.

    Parents have the right to teach their own children their own values...not the public schools.(SB777, Education Code 51890 would mandate same-sex marriage have equal standing with traditional marriage in school classes K-12)

    God has created man and woman and commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth. This cannot be done in same-sex unions and is expressly against God's plan for his children on earth. Societies that have embraced homosexuality have been destroyed (Sodom & Gomorrah, for example) by God.

    For these reasons, I strongly urge you to vote YES ON 8. I am!
  • It's a very interesting debate, probably one of the most interesting in many years. I moved back to California 2 years ago after spending 5 in Oregon. Personally, I'm against Prop. 8 but I feel that everyone has a right to a vote and that it should not be the decision of the courts. If it passes, it passes. If it fails, it fails. I have no problems with gays being allowed to have the same rights as everyone else. My mom always tells me that this is similar to things she saw growing up in the South in the 1960's, only with a different set of citizens.

    Thanks!

    http://kreuzer33.wordpress.com/2008/10/23/yes-o...
  • Carl S.
    You might be grasping here. A Catholic priest does not perform a wedding as much as he sanctifies it. Marriage in this sense is Sacrament, not a contract, where the church sanctifies a love giving, life giving union that becomes a family. The social contract required by a state is already fulfilled when a couple shows up with the license. The church does not refuse to marry, but declines to sanctify it. The state cannot force a church to sanctify anything against that church's criteria - that would be legally untenable. It would be akin to a Christian couple bringing suit against a synagogue, or vis-a-verse, for not marrying them in the rites of Judaism.

    As a Sacrament, marriage and Holy Orders (ordination) are just like Communion and Reconciliation (confession) for professed members. it would be unconstitutional for the state to force any church to administer their rites on any it deemed as a nonbeliever. You might be able to litigate without the Divine, as in: "do you swear to tell the truth, nothing but the . . ." , but you can't litigate against it.
blog comments powered by Disqus