Prop H8 - Mormon Law
A wealthy, powerful (and mostly out-of-state) religion poured unprecedented wealth into an effort to write its own doctrines into law and take away the rights of a group of people it does not like.
An interesting documentary is opening and if you get the chance I suggest that you check it out.
Titled “8: The Mormon Proposition,” the film examines the role the Mormon Church played in helping pass Proposition 8 here in California, which repealed marriage equality.
Some statistics: Only about 2 percent of Californians are Mormons, yet church members poured huge sums of money into the campaign – at least $22 million, including $3 million in the final week that came directly from Salt Lake City, Utah. Thanks to intervention by the Mormon hierarchy, Mormons provided more than 70 percent of the total budget for pro-Prop 8. The money was used for a deluge of ads and a well-coordinated ground campaign.
As the New York Times put it, “The money financed a sophisticated media barrage that involved blogs, Twitter and YouTube videos, as well as scary (and, according to the movie, misleading) television ads, and an aggressive door-to-door campaign whose foot soldiers were instructed on how not to appear Mormon.” The result was a narrow win for marriage equality opponents, 52 to 48 percent.
Of course, Mormons were not the only religion involved in the campaign. The Roman Catholic and other various fundamentalist groups jumped into the fray as well. But no other religious group could match the Mormons when it came to money, power, and media relations efforts.
Don't get me wrong, religious groups have a right to speak out on social issues. But in this case, a wealthy, powerful (and mostly out-of-state) church poured unprecedented sums into an effort to write its own pet theology into our secular law and take away the rights of a group of people it does not like. To a lot of Americans that just didn’t seem right.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State's Executive Director, Rev. Barry W. Lynn, appears in the film, making the point that when a powerful church is spending huge sums to influence everyone’s lives, the American public has the right to know about it. Religious groups, he says, should not expect to be exempt from reporting requirements that are imposed on other organizations that engage in political activity.
California has reporting requirements that the church was required to follow. But many other states don’t, and in some cases, churches have demanded the right to be exempt from even minimal reporting requirements under the First Amendment. In those cases it can be very difficult to follow the money if an aggressive fundamentalist group is backing an Astroturf campaign to enshrine its doctrines into law.
It’s also reasonable to expect churches to abide by the law. In the case of the Mormon Church, that was not always done. The church failed to report non-monetary contributions in a timely manner and was recently fined $5,539 by the California FPPC. (Sure, $5,550 is peanuts to the Mormon hierarchy, but it sets an interesting precedent of accountability.)
California’s debate over same-sex marriage is far from over. A case is progressing in the federal courts arguing that California’s vote to ban same-sex marriage violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection. Also, the California Supreme Court has just finished hearing arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, arguing that Proposition 8 enshrined right-wing Christian and Mormon theology into law, and thus infringes on the religious liberty of faith groups that support same-sex marriage.
The religious right has yet to come up with even one legitimate secular reason for banning same-sex marriage. A few have tried but what they argue isn’t even remotely persuasive. Their rants about child-rearing and “traditional marriage” would be better put forward as arguments against allowing divorce. And I’m not aware of any Christian right-wing organizations (or Mormons, for that matter) campaigning to make divorce illegal.
You can see a trailer for “8: The Mormon Proposition” on the movie’s Web site. The documentary is playing in just a few major US cities this weekend but it will be available on DVD by July 13.
So pull up some popcorn and take a look. You will be disturbed – but also I hope, enlightened. _ source: Rob Boston, AU: 18June2010
|
Welcome!
Change Location:
An attorney appearing on behalf of Chancy Leavell entered a not guilty plea Wednesday on …
An Antelope man was sentenced to time in jail for doing contracting work …
Two San Francisco congressional election volunteers’ “Impeach Obama” …
Local law enforcement agencies made more Labor Day DUI arrests than last …
|
that is awsome. I think the morman religion is totally disgusting because they allow multiple wives and I think they are totally disgusting. The first amenment (upon which this country was founded) allows me to sleep with whoever I want and this means that since I am a gay hispanic then I can sleep with other guys. That is what the first imendment is about and we should all rise up against the mormans. If they are against it they should be put a rubber on there heads.
OMG....
If the people of California did not want Prop 8 ; there is no amount of money for slick advertising that could have swayed them ; but we need someone to blame for our failure so lets do the Christians as it is the root of all that is evil and we will praise Iran as they have no one of this sexual persuasion; take a look at the links below and check your Hamas Buds view on gay rights or just the rights of Gays to exist and let us compare it to the evil Israelis who have the only Anti discrimination laws for gay population in the Middle East. Sure beats the hanging and flogging your Hamas brethren propose. Hey check this out Israel provides sanctuary for Gays that are being persecuted by the Palestinians. Hey look here a young gay man was told if he was a Suicide Bomber his sins would be forgiven. So you have a guy that makes a documentary that is apparently far from factual and gets to see Robert Redford for his efforts and gets sell his DVD on Amazon. (not an endorsement) And for some reason I should care. Just for those who will not go to the links the LDS Church officially says they donated a little 189,903.58 and I believe them and I bet they have the records to prove it. Cont...
Cont... TP let me get this straight (not a pun) you deplore a Christian Organization for its active political involvement in a democratic process against gay marriage and you praise an Islamic Organization that supports the denial or genocide (do not know if this the right word but you get the point) of people of the Gay persuasion and you chastise Israel for human rights and they are the ones who protect homosexuals from possible death from the supported Islamic Organization. You since my confusion; I mean come on Sybil would have had a hard time dealing with this.
Links
http://www.themormonproposition.net/
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article575744.ece
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/4/105048/1597/340/680035
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Israel
bombender- Mormanism is not a christian organization it is a cult.
http://www.seafox.com/mormons.html
They have no business sticking their nose where it doesn't belong.
But they have every right to do just that.
Actually they don'
(3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office. t
Alfresco if you go by the dictionary definition of a cult all religions will fit that definition.
Cult:
A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
The followers of such a religion or sect.
A system or community of religious worship and ritual. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
The object of such devotion.
An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.
It is every Americans right to put their nose or any other appendage into issues they perceive to concern them and their future. Just like it is California’s right to boycott and bash Arizona for its immigration policy. Just like I can say SOAD sucks.
alfresco, it is your view they are a cult. Many think the same of the Islamic radicals too.
Bombender's observation hold true. The conflict in TPs mind must be unbearable as his rantings are all over the map. His only consistency is his inconsistency and his undending attacks on Christianity and the Zionists.
Actually yes they can: The LDS Church reported contributions through Protect Marriage.Com Coalition; these were private donations given to a cause by church members through a private organization. Do you not think the LDS Church has a legal team and if they could do you not think they would have had their pants sued off by now.
Enough of the ignorance and bigotry! If you don't like what Mormons believe, then stay away from their churches and don't accept their doctrines and teachings. BUT...it is THEIR religion, THEIR beliefs, and THEIR RIGHT to either stand up for those beliefs or not. NONE of you have any right to condemn them or their political actions. Everything you have said can also be called against Catholics, Baptists, Jews, or even Muslims. Their doctrine is THEIR doctrine, and none of you has the right to belittle them or their structure.
Now...get it straight folks: the LDS church does NOT condone plural maririage, and has not for over 150 years. There are some small sects that are Mormon in basis but not part of the LDS church that do believe in plural marriage. But even then...SO WHAT!? How does that hurt any of you? As long as they keep their communities separate and don't tell YOU what YOU must accept or believe, what do you care?
As far as Prop 8 goes, the small groups who practice polygamy had NO effect on Prop 8. Get a grip folks. And, yes, if the main LDS church wants to stand up for what they believe is right (traditional family structure), then GOOD FOR THEM. At least they aren't sitting on their asses doing nothing like so many so-called Christian churches who cower every time someone from the government says "boo".
FYI TP; the debate is over. This is not a court case. This was a RE-affirmation of a Constitutional position already established.
deja_view, I am glad that our country has the freedom of religion, for all to practice, and we have choices, but I do question the cult status of the mormon church, for I believe there are way to many cult like aspects, there are many websites identifying the pro cult and the non cult aspects, its up to ones interpetation, and the few times I attended a mormon service, I felt the same. I also believe that no matter how much money the mormon church poured into the campaign, the people voted, and all of their votes could not be bought
a_flock, were you stoned when you typed the above post?
TP said.-Don't get me wrong, religious groups have a right to speak out on social issues. But in this case, a wealthy, powerful (and mostly out-of-state) church poured unprecedented sums into an effort to write its own pet theology into our secular law and take away the rights of a group of people it does not like. To a lot of Americans that just didn’t seem right.
Loomis says. -Since churches are breaching the separation by becoming more and more involved in issues, whether it's gay marriage or the Arizona immigration law I believe that they should lose their tax exempt status and start paying taxes like the rest of us.
I know that some of you think that TP is also Skeptic. I believe the TP is also A Flock of Smeagles and Allen Cassidy. There is no other explanation for his ability to support one group's ideology and damn another group for the same ideology.
lonewolf - Calm down. It's just G_P in one of his many faces.
bombender - I only suggested you see the documentary. Did organized religion violate the separation clause? Review the evidence and then make up your own mind.
SF Gate (09-17-2008) 07:28 PDT -- "Opposition to a California ballot measure to ban same-sex marriage is mounting... according to a Field Poll to be released today. The poll found that just 38 percent of likely voters support the measure, while 55 percent intend to vote no. That compares with 42 percent in support and 51 percent opposed in July."
[Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/18/BATM12VSRA.DTL&hw=Proposition+field+poll&sn=005&sc=072#ixzz0ranuJqOA]
Mormon money tipped the balance.
Californians Against Hate released figures showing that $17.67 million was contributed by 59,000 Mormon families since August to groups like Yes on 8. Contributions in support of Prop. 8 total $22.88 million. For whatever reason the Mormons are trying to buy some respect from Christian religions.
Tax law forbids tax-exempt entities such as religions to endorse candidates, but it generally doesn’t forbid them to speak out on referenda. Still, it's deeply troubling to see such extraordinarily powerful and wealthy religions as the Mormon Church and the Roman Catholic Church throwing their weight around so blatantly on a sensitive civil rights and civil liberties issue. In effect, these two organizations, aided by the Christian right, are trying to impose their particular faith doctrines on the whole state. This is wrong.
Deja_View - I had no problem until they made THEIR doctrine MY law. It's ironic that polygamists in Utah can dictate marriage laws for Californians.
How about when Prop H8 gets overturned, you pack up your magic underwear and hie thee to Kolob in the twinkling of an eye?
Brigham Young had 57 wives. Gays and Lesbians want only one.
Deja wrote: "As long as they keep their communities separate and don't tell YOU what YOU must accept or believe, what do you care?"
I think that is what the blog is about. Freedom from religion.
I hate the argument that the LDS church can't get involved because it is a mostly an "out of state" church, with headquarters in Utah. That's like criticizing the Catholic church for being involved because they are mostly an "out of COUNTRY" church, with headquarters in Italy. Stupid stupid argument. They are BOTH established in California, own property and have built buildings in California where marriages take place. In my opinion, yes it is morally wrong for these churches to impose on the civil rights of others, but they are NOT doing anything illegal. People, stop making stupid arguments.
Also, stop pretending to know that the Mormons are the reason prop 8 failed. No one knows what the outcome would have been without their involvement. If it helps your psyche to have someone to blame, fine. But don't say you "know" they made it fail. For me, Mormon propaganda (media, missionaries) is VERY annoying and makes me want to do the opposite. It seems there are more people in California that dislike Mormons than like....so if anything people voted NO on prop 8 so they won't side with the Mormons. Maybe there would have been a higher percentage saying YES on 8 if the Mormons weren't involved. NO ONE KNOWS. It's silly to assume what I just did and it's just as silly for you to assume it's the Mormon's fault.
larry - Are you honestly saying that if 77 percent of the funding for Yes on Prop 8 would have suddenly vanished Prop 8 would have passed anyway? That's quite an extraordinary claim, requiring extraordinary evidence. Got any facts?
"I don't have any respect for the Religious Right. There is no place in this country for practicing religion in politics. That goes for Falwell, Robertson and all the rest of these political preachers. They are a detriment to the country." ~ Sen. Barry Goldwater
ThosPayne,
Apparently you didn't read my post carefully enough. Of course my claim is extraordinary! I did that on purpose! My entire point was that NO ONE KNOWS what % of people would have voted for prop 8 had Mormons not been involved. It's just as extraordinary for you or anyone else to claim that if the Mormons weren't involved that 'No on 8' would have won. Do you have evidence or facts that it wouldn't have passed without their involvement? NO, YOU DON'T. Let me repeat myself NO ONE KNOWS. You have every right to not have respect in their participation and that religious involvement in politics is wrong (and i even AGREE WITH you). But no one can put BLAME on them for prop 8 passing. You can only blame 52% of the voters, the ones who voted yes. I'm sure the majority of the 52% were NOT Mormons and I how do you not know the majority of the 52% wouldn't have voted that way anyway?? YOU DON'T. NO ONE KNOWS.
nice try larryscott, but not factually correct.
The LDS Church uses state amendments and propositions on sex to get Republicans elected, Republicans who take a solemn vow never to raise taxes. This latest round on doing state sanctifying hating on 'Teh Gay' Peeps has been documented for a very long time. They go from state to state and continuously challenge any civil rights laws and threaten to sue the states that challenge them when they deliberately break the laws on campaign finance.
There were many LDS people who did not think this was a good idea and documented exactly what was going on.
If the LDS Church was not involved, there would have been no proposition 8 at all. Period. The LDS Political Hierarchy was fooled by the Texas Southern Baptist contingent, which cooked this wedge bigotry up (again..... they started it during the Civil War ) and convinced them that a political alliance with the Catholic Church would be a great way to gain political allies and national level credibility. Then LDS has the organization and the manpower, the Catholics throw in some money, it's tax deductible to the church, no body has to declare how much they donated, because NOM will sue, and away they go.
Back to the original post. Out of state religion ? No. Only the headquarters. Sizable LDS contingent here in CA, as in Idaho and Nevada. 2% of the population of CA is nothing to sneeze at. Re comments about "cult." No more "cult" than any other …
Larry, TP, you are both arguing the same point using the same argument.
There is no way to prove or disprove how many of the 52% who voted YES on Prop8 would have voted the same way if Mormon money had not been involved.
This is a very emotional issue that probably couldn't be swayed with advertising. Is there anyone among us who does not already have an opinion on this subject that advertising could have changed their mind?
Not likely!
Greg - An emotional political campaign that can't be swayed by money?
You're kidding, right?
larryscott - Saying that YOU don't know and screaming "NO ONE KNOWS" is not the same.
In essence, you're attempting to convince us that $80 million spent in another state's referendum has the same effect as spending nothing. But because it made no difference at all, the Mormon Church spent $80 million anyway.
Truly, you are a man of faith.
Why does it seem that so much of the rhetoric in support of same-sex marriage shows intolerance for religion? Catholics and Mormons are part of our community too. How much of this is about achieving something positive for gay citizens, and how much is about co-opting the term "marriage" just to spit in the face of traditional religion? (Knowing, of course, that "civil unions" would have the same effect without asking the State to publicly set a new definition for the word "marriage.")
Swing voters don't like the sense of animosity and the hidden agenda The SF mayor's "whether you like it or not!" got Prop 8 passed.
No, I'm not kidding.
Could you be swayed from your position by money?
Because currently, "religion" in the United States is expected not to let one sect dictate who can and cannot marry.
The LDS and Catholic and the other churches which chose to go this route decided not only to money launder, by using tithes and coercion to directly fund political campaigns, in violation of the separation of church and state rule of the Constitution, and of the tax code of the IRS, but they chose to degrade every female in the state of California as nothing more than a vehicle to be forced to bear children by religious authorities, or be considered by the state as unfit to marry.
Again and again, ad nauseum, "the only purpose of marriage is for the bearing of children."
Really, amazingly disgusting behavior. And they tried to DIVORCE other's existing marriages.
If they want to be cruel to their own kind, let them, they can do what they want, but to deny a sacred bond to others ?
This is not what our country's "freedom" is based on. It smacks of paternalism, patriarchy, arrogance. To look at somebody else's daughters and declare their function in life is to make children for somebody ELSE'S pleasure ?!
They weren't "swing" voters. They did what they were told. They can do what they want, but then the attempted cover up of what they did and the backlash and the backlash of the backlash - meanwhile Schubert Flint laughs, earns another million in fees, and runs to the bank and plans the next round.
Giacomo - Because organized, tax-exempt religion has taken away our individual right to worship or not - to exercise freedom of, or from religion.
There is no practical reason to take away the rights of a minority because you don't like them.
Greg. The question is moot. I'm not a political campaign.
How about if Il put the question to you? If (hypothetically) every day, 24-7, you were bombarded with frightening news that an obscure USA-hating dictator way around the world was building nuclear weapons and if we didn't stop him, he was planning to blow up Washington DC, would you be concerned enough to vote to go to war with him? Even if he had no delivery system for his alleged WMDs?
Of course, the above scenario is purely hypothetical, so feel free to answer candidly.
erratum: "...way around the world" should read "...half way around the world." (Dammit, who moved my reading glasses?)
People were writing chain letters to the editor in droves, declaring that they had "friends" who were gay, that they knew children who were gay that they worked with, that it was an addictive behavior, that it was a sign of mental illness, that it could be "cured" with the proper therapy.
They were serious.
Just substitute the word "Mormon" in there, or Black, or Latino, Indian, or Protestant, Agnostic, Hindu, Sikh, or .... Celt, Scottish, Irish, Druid, Jehovah's Witness, whatever. I will continue to be amazed that so many people feel justified in abusing the basic human dignity of people, who do not sometimes look like other people or do not act like other people, in the most superficial and subtle ways, yet are here to practice freedom of religion and who are following our laws and who have actual family values- as they have a family they'd prefer others not to put a litmus test on.
All it did was create bad feelings. As planned.
In this country we don't force people to get church weddings. Quite yet.
TP, How much money was spent by the "no" on 8 and where did the money come from? Answer, please with dollar numbers and facts.
TP,
I recognize propaganda when I see it, and it's pretty obvious you do too. Money is the point of your blog, so I'm not sure why you say it's a moot question to ask if you could be swayed by a campaign that spent a lot of it trying to do just that.
How about this; could any campaign influence your belief that gays and lesbians should be able to be married in California?
Not likely, and I personally believe most people are like you; everyone already has an opinion about this topic and any campaign waged to influence them was a waste of money.
Prop 8 became an issue because our courts decided to make law.
greg, I don't think that anyone that posts in the AJ could have been swayed by money. Money does buy a lot of TV commercials and unfortunately there are way too many people that rely solely on those 30 second ads to make up their mind on how they will vote. I think that is what whoever meant by saying that money buys votes. Trgardless of political leanings those who post have the ability to think on their own, for the most part.
Personally I feel that all churches are taking too much interest in politics and issues and they run the full spectrum from Prop 8 to the Arizona immigration law. I truly believe that the different religions should have the same freedom of expression that individuals do but they should also be deprived of their tax exempt status just like the individuals. Have a free voice, but pay for the privilege, just like me.
loomis,
The property that churches sit on is the only thing that's tax exempt. The people who are part of a church pay all the same taxes as you and me.
Land that's set aside as part of Placer Legacy is also exempt from paying property taxes. However, the people who support this land trust are still required to pay their personal taxes.
But that's not the issue. I'm not talking about just the people who participate here on the AJ as being unswayed by political campaign money. I'm talking about this specific topic and the strong feelings most people already have about it, despite any commercials they might be bombarded with.
Besides, with all due respect, I'd like to hear from TP whether he would be so easily swayed.
greg, please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that donations were also exempt.
loomis,
Yes, you're right. I was only making the direct comparison to property taxes.
As with most contributions to any registered charitable organization, money donated to a church can be deducted from your personal income tax.
To be fair here, there were no tax-exempt funds spent by anyone involved for political purposes. Now that would be against the law. If any group of people wants to donate or spend money on political campaigns, that is their right. Lot's of money flows into both sides of the campaigns, and it is dishonest and incorrect to attack anyone for doing so.
Donations to the church are tax exempt, and cannot be spent on political campaigns. That money is typically spent on maintaining the church. I don't know how the Mormons spend their money, nor do I care to know. I do believe many churches, but not all, use some of their resources to help the community. They can always do more, I suspect, but I am not the judge.
Why are religious institutions tax exempt in the first place?
Scientology, for example, cites its own tax exemption as proof the United States government accepts it as a religion rather than a cult.
"Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous; if a man really wants to make a million dollars the best way would be to start his own religion." (L. Ron Hubbard) "The only way to control people is to lie to them." (ibid.)
In 1978 the Mormon Church announced it had received a new revelation. God announced he was no longer a racist and men of African descent could henceforth enjoy holy office. (Translation: the IRS threatened to cancel the Mormon Church's non-profit tax exempt status) Only once before had such a revelation been sent by God; when the US government was about to seize the properties and assets of the Mormon Church, the Prophet received a revelation from God that polygyny was no longer necessary.
God works in mysterious ways.
TP,
Churches are only some of the tax exempt charitable organizations who receive tax exemptions for their donors.
If tax exempt status was taken away from charitable organizations it would be a catastrophe for many people, mostly the poor and sick.
People are going to believe what they will about God. That's the beauty of religious freedom, because that freedom gives TP the right to worship his navel without fear of persecution from the people who worship on the other side of the body.
Personally, I think bigotry is pathetic in every form, whether it's racial or religious. In this blog we've seen a examples of both.
Acorn is an example of a tax exempt organization that was always highly political. Far more than any church that I know of. Most churches go out of their way to avoid anything that might be considered political. There are tax exempt organizations that raise money and also lobby for legislation. I don't know that it is legal, but it is fact. Most of these relate to health and welfare issues. Opens up a big can of worms when you start picking on one class of tax exempt.
Greg is right, bigotry is bountiful in the blogs. Go out and see the good works that people are doing, before you start casting your stones.
Why are religious institutions tax exempt in the first place?
gregcalac - Charities and the churches that run them are two distinct entities. If churches paid tax like every other American institution, it would affect charities not at all.
It's not just one tax that religious organizations don't have to pay, but an entire constellation of them. Clergy are exempt from federal taxes on housing and can opt out of Social Security and Medicare withholding. Religious employers are exempt from federal and state unemployment taxes, and in some states, religious publications are exempt from sales tax. Church benefit and retirement plans do not require the church employer to match its employees' contributions. Churches are automatically exempted from filing annual reports on their financial status and activities, and donations made to churches are eligible for income tax deductions. And, of course, the two major tax breaks - churches do not have to pay income taxes and do not have to pay taxes on all the property they own.
If they want to play politics, let them buy a ticket like everyone else.
TP,
The whole point of your blog is based on the fact that people within the Mormon church contributed to the Yes on 8 campaign. So what? You go on to say, "Don't get me wrong, religious groups have the right to speak out on social issues." Good point. Why not leave it at that?
But now it appears you have moved on to exact a measure of retribution on this and all churches by raising a question about their long-time tax exempt status.
How would removing the tax exempt status of charitable organizations change the outcome of the Prop 8 vote?
Oh, I see. You want to punish people for standing up against something that they believe runs contrary to their core beliefs. Why single out their involvement in Prop 8?
Why not just go ahead and say that you think their beliefs are stupid and they shouldn't be allowed to practice their faith in America, especially if they oppose gay marriage?
It doesn't matter to me whether churches in America continue to have tax exemption in the ways they have for years. I'm fairly confident that God does not need an ounce of help from mankind to keep His church alive.
But, in all fairness, and by all rights, any changes made would have to be made to all charitable organizations otherwise the religious bigotry would shine even brighter for all to see.
TP chooses to ignore the good that most churches do, but instead takes exception with the way that a church meets the spiritual needs of those that it serves. TP believes that government will do a better job at meeting the needs of the community.
Only problem is, we might need to add more criminal justice and mental health capacity to our systems to compensate for the void that will certainly grow beyond what it is today.
Isn't ironic that the gay community for years has begged others to respect their first amendment right to free speech… to be heard and respected BUT when those who don't agree with them politically, socially or philosophically assert the very same right to free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to organize and vote any way they want... gays systematically try to harass and blackball anyone who donated money... they have harassed people at home… at their place of employment… they have vandalized homes, cars, and houses of worship, Mormon Temples... they have physically assaulted innocent people who were standing on the corner with a sign that says "vote yes on Prop 8." Well, you don't see this type of un-American behavior by the majority of individuals that simply supported Prop 8 because they assert there right to fundamentally beleive that men should only have sex with women, that the commandment given to Adam and Eve to "multiply and replenish the earth" remains in effect and that children should be raised by a loving mother and father where it is possible... what a sad irony and blatant example of hypocrisy... and the gay community expects to gain my respect or to be treated civilly… they continually take two steps forward and five steps back every time. Now they blame the Mormons for all their troubles… give me a break.