![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
(→{{Response label}}) |
(→{{Response label}}) |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
TEXT {{nw}} | TEXT {{nw}} | ||
− | The Church opposes legislation that seeks to control conscience or suppress the freedom of the soul and has supported legislation that expands the freedom to choose same-sex relationships. | + | The Church opposes legislation that seeks to control conscience or suppress the freedom of the soul and has supported legislation that expands the freedom to choose same-sex relationships. It has also sought to preserve the legal definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. These two things do not conflict. |
+ | |||
+ | There is a difference between supporting and protecting individual's freedom to choose how they want to form their families, and accepting their definitions as the legal definition that applies to everyone. Preserving the definition of marriage does not impose morality not does it take away rights. The Church recognizes the unique benefit that a union between a man and a woman has to society and child raising and has sought to keep that recognition in laws. Individuals are still free to chose to form their families differently and the Church has supported laws that would help them make that choice. | ||
=== The Church believes in agency === | === The Church believes in agency === | ||
Line 20: | Line 22: | ||
"We do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul." D&C 134:4 | "We do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul." D&C 134:4 | ||
− | === | + | === Definitions do not impose morality === |
− | The government uses legal definitions to lay out a legal framework in which citizens interact with each other. Different people may come up with their own definitions, but legal definitions affect everyone. For example, drinking while driving is illegal in most places. The Word of Wisdom prohibits drinking whether you are driving or not. However, the legal definition and the definition under the Word of Wisdom is different. Under the legal definition, the cut off is a blood alcohol level of 0.08%. Under Mormonism, the limit is any consumption of alcohol. The difference between the legal definition and | + | The government uses legal definitions to lay out a legal framework in which citizens interact with each other. Different people may come up with their own definitions, but legal definitions affect everyone. For example, drinking while driving is illegal in most places. The Word of Wisdom prohibits drinking whether you are driving or not. However, the legal definition and the definition under the Word of Wisdom is different. Under the legal definition, the cut off is a blood alcohol level of 0.08%. Under Mormonism, the limit is any consumption of alcohol. The difference between the legal definition and the Mormon definition does not prohibit our exercise of religion. We are free to use our definition for our purposes while the legal definition is what is applied in legal cases. |
The same applies to marriages. There needs to be a legal definition of marriage to set a framework for citizens to interact with each other, but people are still free to consider themselves married even though the government may not recognize it. Many countries do not recognize religious marriages. In these countries, the legal definition of marriage requires being married by a civil officer. However, this does not affect the right of individuals to consider themselves married when they get married in their church. Many couples have a religious marriage, but not a legal marriage. While they are free to consider themselves married, when it comes to a legal framework for interacting with other citizens, they are not considered married. Because of these laws, many Latter-day Saints couples are forced to get married outside of the temple and later be sealed in the temple. While the legal definition of marriage may not include temple marriages, this does not prohibit our ability to recognize temple marriages. | The same applies to marriages. There needs to be a legal definition of marriage to set a framework for citizens to interact with each other, but people are still free to consider themselves married even though the government may not recognize it. Many countries do not recognize religious marriages. In these countries, the legal definition of marriage requires being married by a civil officer. However, this does not affect the right of individuals to consider themselves married when they get married in their church. Many couples have a religious marriage, but not a legal marriage. While they are free to consider themselves married, when it comes to a legal framework for interacting with other citizens, they are not considered married. Because of these laws, many Latter-day Saints couples are forced to get married outside of the temple and later be sealed in the temple. While the legal definition of marriage may not include temple marriages, this does not prohibit our ability to recognize temple marriages. | ||
− | Proposition 8 did not affect the ability of same-sex couples to define themselves as being married. What it did, was set a legal framework so that other citizens do not have to consider them to be married. Same-sex couples are free to practice whatever morality they want when choosing to form families, but Proposition 8 | + | Proposition 8 did not affect the ability of same-sex couples to define themselves as being married. What it did, was set a legal framework so that other citizens do not have to consider them to be married. Same-sex couples are free to practice whatever morality they want when choosing to form families, but Proposition 8 protects other citizens from having the morality of same-sex couples forced upon them. Indeed, Proposition 8 was not about forcing our morality on same-sex couples, but insulated us from being legally bound to accept their morality as being legally equivalent to our morality. |
+ | |||
+ | === Definitions do not take away rights === | ||
+ | |||
+ | A definition in and of itself does not give or take away rights, except arguably, the right to a legal definition. It is how the definition is applied that affects rights. For example, the legal definition of being drunk would not mean anything without a law discriminating drivers who are drunk against those who are not. The same thing is true for marriage. The definition of marriage does not give people rights, but how marriage is viewed in the law. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Proposition 8 did not effect how the law treated same-sex couples. Because of previous Supreme Court cases, the Californian law requires civil unions to be treated the same as marriages. The Church does not oppose these rights. These Supreme Court cases only apply to Californian law. It does not apply to the United States law. Same-sex couples do not have the same rights as opposite sex couples in California because it is treated differently under the United States law, not because of the definition in California. Changing the definition of marriage in California would not give Californian same-sex couples equal rights under United States law. Proposition 8 would not give same-sex couples any additional rights they did not have before. All it would do would be to change the definition of marriage and remove the distinction between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples. | ||
− | === | + | === Definitions recognize distinctions === |
− | + | Legal definitions by themselves do not impose morality nor do they take away rights. They do show a need to make a distinction between two different concepts. They create a separate category, which is inherently unequal. We believe that a union between a man and a woman has a distinct benefit to society that a union between two men or two women cannot bring to society. A legal definition will recognize this difference. This effects how things are taught in schools and general cultural understanding. It may also have future ramifications that are not completely understood. | |
− | + | Other people believe society will not benefit from recognizing the unique benefit a union between a man and a woman has on society. We respect their opinions, but we do not have to agree with them in order to respect their opinion. | |
=={{Conclusion label}}== | =={{Conclusion label}}== |
This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.
==
Critics charge that by its political opposition to same-sex marriage, the Church is attempting to "impose its own morality" on those who are not members.
To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, [[../CriticalSources|click here]]
====
TEXT [needs work]
The Church opposes legislation that seeks to control conscience or suppress the freedom of the soul and has supported legislation that expands the freedom to choose same-sex relationships. It has also sought to preserve the legal definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. These two things do not conflict.
There is a difference between supporting and protecting individual's freedom to choose how they want to form their families, and accepting their definitions as the legal definition that applies to everyone. Preserving the definition of marriage does not impose morality not does it take away rights. The Church recognizes the unique benefit that a union between a man and a woman has to society and child raising and has sought to keep that recognition in laws. Individuals are still free to chose to form their families differently and the Church has supported laws that would help them make that choice.
According to D&C 134:4
"We do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul." D&C 134:4
The government uses legal definitions to lay out a legal framework in which citizens interact with each other. Different people may come up with their own definitions, but legal definitions affect everyone. For example, drinking while driving is illegal in most places. The Word of Wisdom prohibits drinking whether you are driving or not. However, the legal definition and the definition under the Word of Wisdom is different. Under the legal definition, the cut off is a blood alcohol level of 0.08%. Under Mormonism, the limit is any consumption of alcohol. The difference between the legal definition and the Mormon definition does not prohibit our exercise of religion. We are free to use our definition for our purposes while the legal definition is what is applied in legal cases.
The same applies to marriages. There needs to be a legal definition of marriage to set a framework for citizens to interact with each other, but people are still free to consider themselves married even though the government may not recognize it. Many countries do not recognize religious marriages. In these countries, the legal definition of marriage requires being married by a civil officer. However, this does not affect the right of individuals to consider themselves married when they get married in their church. Many couples have a religious marriage, but not a legal marriage. While they are free to consider themselves married, when it comes to a legal framework for interacting with other citizens, they are not considered married. Because of these laws, many Latter-day Saints couples are forced to get married outside of the temple and later be sealed in the temple. While the legal definition of marriage may not include temple marriages, this does not prohibit our ability to recognize temple marriages.
Proposition 8 did not affect the ability of same-sex couples to define themselves as being married. What it did, was set a legal framework so that other citizens do not have to consider them to be married. Same-sex couples are free to practice whatever morality they want when choosing to form families, but Proposition 8 protects other citizens from having the morality of same-sex couples forced upon them. Indeed, Proposition 8 was not about forcing our morality on same-sex couples, but insulated us from being legally bound to accept their morality as being legally equivalent to our morality.
A definition in and of itself does not give or take away rights, except arguably, the right to a legal definition. It is how the definition is applied that affects rights. For example, the legal definition of being drunk would not mean anything without a law discriminating drivers who are drunk against those who are not. The same thing is true for marriage. The definition of marriage does not give people rights, but how marriage is viewed in the law.
Proposition 8 did not effect how the law treated same-sex couples. Because of previous Supreme Court cases, the Californian law requires civil unions to be treated the same as marriages. The Church does not oppose these rights. These Supreme Court cases only apply to Californian law. It does not apply to the United States law. Same-sex couples do not have the same rights as opposite sex couples in California because it is treated differently under the United States law, not because of the definition in California. Changing the definition of marriage in California would not give Californian same-sex couples equal rights under United States law. Proposition 8 would not give same-sex couples any additional rights they did not have before. All it would do would be to change the definition of marriage and remove the distinction between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples.
Legal definitions by themselves do not impose morality nor do they take away rights. They do show a need to make a distinction between two different concepts. They create a separate category, which is inherently unequal. We believe that a union between a man and a woman has a distinct benefit to society that a union between two men or two women cannot bring to society. A legal definition will recognize this difference. This effects how things are taught in schools and general cultural understanding. It may also have future ramifications that are not completely understood.
Other people believe society will not benefit from recognizing the unique benefit a union between a man and a woman has on society. We respect their opinions, but we do not have to agree with them in order to respect their opinion.
====
Text [needs work]
== Notes == None
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now