Legal perspectives...and where do we go from here?

I recently listened to a podcast that was interviewing a gay father of 4 who happens to have a law degree in Family Law. I learned new insights of the kind of law suits the church is trying to avoid which helps me understand the policy from a different perspective. Here is the link to the podcast I listened to with James Ord. http://athoughtfulfaith.org

Historically the church had to deal with 40 years after 1890 Post Manifesto to end Polygamy. As a review for those who may not be aware. There was a time before UT became a state where the US seized the churches assets: their schools, farms, buildings, etc. In the history of the government this has been the only time they have done this because they felt it was so harmful and unacceptable to exist their nation. They would only give it back after they agreed that they would step away from it.

Understanding this you can see how then LDS have a paranoia hyper vigilant to sure itself up legally to never again be in a situation where that would happen. At that time period following there were many lawsuits that were filed to churches where there were no sympathetic juries; it was financially devastating. So, they formed the church into a corporation where the President of the church has sole ownership, they would form other entities as a legal structure against risk.

Now lets move on to the current policy. The church has spent over 250 million dollars in the past inhibiting gay civil rights. This does not include other countries. Dallin H. Oaks wrote a memo as a response to what the church was perceiving as a softening to gay rights. The church has a very good law firm they use Kirton and McKonkie which has helped them since the 70’s.

Elder Christofferson touched on the matter very briefly in his interview about the child parent conflict that they create in the church to families with gay parents. What is interesting to me is that the church acknowledges that they are causing psychological harm in gay parent families. The church program is such an integral part of their lives, and because the language of worthiness of their parents are ground into the child, extorting their parents, the US has found that to be considered child abuse.

In the past and today the PR/ church had blamed the parent for the damage. But there have been a number of recent cases in CA popping up where the church has been sued, especially when both parents did not agree to the baptism. So the church has had to weigh in the collateral damage that it would follow with this new policy. The policy hurts innocent kids especially the ones who are already members right now. They figure that there a a few 1000 kids who will be hurt, but that they are willing to hurt them to avoid the law suits and interference claims.

These new policies now roll down to the the Stake presidents and Bishops who have to deal with the mess of enacting the policies, and explaining policies. Of course it doesn’t sound very nice to say that this policy was made because they are looking at these children as liabilities. It’s sounds much better as we're protecting the children. This is where the church is moving from a Christian organization to a legal one. Because policies are being made from a legal context not a Christ like one. This is supposed to be Christ's church after all.

The church has always had an interesting culture of sex, roles and the parts they play into the eternities with a male and female God creating spirit children. In a theology that says every man must be married to a woman in order to be with God and progress in heaven, gay Mormons are anomalies. No one quite knows what to do with them, yet we know that "it is not good that the man [or woman] should be alone" (Genesis 2:18), that in the long-term relationship of marriage we can learn how to love unconditionally, serve and nurture others, and grow into better versions of ourselves. Members use self righteous stands of “We choose not to be gay or live a gay lifestyle”. I’d like to clarify lifestyle, because I hear that a lot. What is a gay lifestyle?…there is no such thing! If a gay person want to have a family lifestyle they are in fact following the righteous desires of companionship and raising children in the gospel. Now they are making it into a civil battle of emphasizing having a certain KIND of family.

This brings then another question to mind. Why isn’t the church looking on a deeper level with the problem? Understanding this problem that is caused by the way the LDS church teaches their doctrine. Instead offering questions such as “How can I change my actions to serve these people? and come up with better ways to serve and help instead of alienating and condemning. It is interesting to note that Jesus in the scriptures never condemns people, only hypocrites. Mormons tend to condemn people through conditional love .“Love the sinner but not the sin”. Because you actually can not truly love someone that you are condemning. And another question I have is why is the Church of Jesus Christ asking 18 year olds to disavow their parents marriage when they already know it’s psychologically damaging …they want to protect the kids right ? It’s because they have to cover their legal behinds, that’s why. And there are missionaries being sent home as we speak because of this very thing. Who in their right mind would disrespect their loving parents like that…seriously.

To reiterate my final thoughts:

Let’s look for deeper solutions…

Ask how we can better serve these people?

How can we teach the gospel without psychologically damaging people?