« Top ten most popular things to do in our new neighborhood | Home | San Diego, here we come. We are neo Nader’s Raiders. »
That’s the problem with Republicans…
By Kate | September 7, 2008
On Friday night we went to do sealings with our ward at the San Diego Temple. It is a majestic building in a holy place. The assignment for our ward was well attended with amazing, amazingly busy people who took time out o their Friday night to serve and worship. The oldest member of the group was, I imagine, close to 80 years old & the youngest probably in her early 20s. I was very impressed by the individual and collective devotion of this eclectic group.
After the temple one of the young couples invited us to Coldstone for ice cream. Never ones to turn down ice cream, we enthusiastically agreed & met them and another couple at the shop. We sat outside with our fudgey gooey treats and conversed in the always perfect San Diego air. We learned a little bit about them, they learned a little bit about us. Often the jovial conversation tends to take a turn for the worst when new people learn a little bit about us. First, they learn we don’t have the same last name. Then, they learn that we met at an anti-Wal Mart film that I screened at BYU. This is when my skeptical shield begins to come up. Glancing at them with distrust I automatically launch into a schpiel about why Wal Mart is a bad place to shop (usually whether or not they questioned the premise with anything more than a raised eyebrow).
Feeling our independent-minded tendencies are exposed I go on the defensive.
The topic in this particular lactose binge chat turned to Proposition 8 which is a big deal in California, especially to Mormons. It is an amendment proposition to amend the California constitution to define marriage as one between a man and a woman only. Most Mormons in the area spend their Saturdays knocking doors & calling people trying to recruit votes for its passage. In fact, we are HIGHLY encouraged to do so every Sunday. (See here for an alternative LDS view about the Proposition).
The girl who invited us to ice cream began talking about gay marriage and the damage she perceived it would do to our society. Perhaps because of my recent immersion into law school, I began to question her assumptions, examples and basic rationalizations. Determined to keep the conversation friendly and Coldstone appropriate I posed all inquiries from a neutral, thought-provoking angle.
However, the conversation quickly escalated and somehow touched on both abortion and the death penalty before you could say, “Jimmany Cricket.” I caught myself semi-shouting “That’s the problem with Republicans…” and the other couple actively jumped up from the table in an attempt to end what they probably perceived to be a potential fist-fight and awkwardly excused themselves and we all got up to end the ice cream social.
The night ended with me stiffly saying, “Ok, great to chat with you guys. Thanks for inviting us. I’ll see you Thursday for visiting teaching. He-heh.”
Needless to say, I don’t think we made any new friends. But, even more disturbingly, I found myself in the old trap that my friend Ash described as interpreting people in the language of my own fears and suspicions. My immediate suspicion of their motives and views kept me from getting to know them and listening to the heart behind their ideas & arguments. I combated pat lines with pat lines and poor logic with poor logic instead of trying to love and see.
Often at church, or school I feel a very “other” feeling. I am the other. “They” don’t think (act, dress, eat) like me.
Friday night, over Germancholattkake ice cream, I realized that that same mentality I have creates the suspicions and hate that I perceive.
My mind is in need of more respect. My heart is in need of softening. My eyes need to automatically look for how we are all the same. My words need to seek to understand not to tear down. My hand needs to gladly reach for the hand of a new friend not suspiciously shake that of the “other.”
Tagged with: Friends • Poltical Issues • San Diego • Temple
September 7th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Proposition 8 is something that has also been on my mind of late, even though I am not a resident of California. I would be interested in how you reconcile your opposition to proposition 8 with the fact that President Monson has, in his role as prophet, told members that they need to be actively campaigning against it. If he is the prophet and speaking prophetically, wouldn’t he know better than the average member what God’s desires are? And, if God wants gays to not marry, isn’t that reason enough?
Now, before you misunderstand me or turn this question back on me, you should know that I have left the church. Also, I am completely 100% opposed to Proposition 8. But I’d love to hear how you can reconcile these two conflicting beliefs.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Hello Kate and Neil. Congrats on your move to San Diego and starting law school and doing whatever you do “Ralph”.
I think it is really intersting how different people’s views can be even when we are part of the same religion or upbringing. I’m amazed even between me and my wife how different our points of view can be at times.
I’d have to say that I’ve always found other people’s points of view somewhat intriguing especially if they are different from my own. Neil and I have probably had a fair share of discussions about our differing opinions but even with all of that I really appreciated having him as a friend. I think that we can say that we have more in common than not, and I value Neil’s friendship knowing that we have some of each.
Anyway you guys are great. Enjoy San Diego! Mariah really wants to move down there someday so maybe we’ll see you if you stick around long enough.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Does coldstone™ use corn syrup free ice cream?
September 7th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
I don’t think there is anything but corn syrup in Coldstone products. Sweet, sweet corn syrup.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Mike- Don’t think I don’t catch the contradiction. The truth is I’m not sure how I quite feel about the whole gay marriage issue or whether the majority of the people should be able to try their darndest to get an amendment passed. Isn’t it their prerogative? I go back & forth.
I do resent the way that people talk about “the gays” when they have OBVIOUSLY never even talked to a single gay person in their life, much less a gay Mormon of which there are many who are silently suffering. I can respect the passion with which people are trying to change politics, but not the lack of compassion for “the other.” Much more compassion is required of us all if we are going to improve the state of things in this world.
Many heterosexual families are in such dire straits I think we all need to spend much more time protecting our own personal marriages and families, not just the legal definition of them.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Good for you, Kate, for focussing on the beam in your own eye and not the motes in others’ eyes.
This is a subject that each of us could write 87 paragraphs about and all come to the same conclusion - it is a difficult and complicated issue, a sad one and not an easy one to resolve.
I’ll just make one point.
The purpose of religion is NOT to answer all our questions. There are numerous unfathamable questions about the human condition: why do good people/children etc. suffer? to name one.
As God told Job “there is no holding place in your heart” for the things of God. Bluntly, there are things that our tiny and woefully inadequate human brains cannot possibly understand.
The purpose of religion is to give us hope and faith when there are NO answers.
The purpose of having an organized religion and a living prophet on the earth is so that there will be a “watchman on the tower” (currently Pres Monson).
We must trust him to look ahead and know the outcome when we cannot see.
In the 1970’s the Equal Rights Amendment was stidently opposed by the church. I was torn, being a law student and Mormon woman, “Liberated” for my day anyway.
So, I trusted the prophet and opposed it also. Turns out Pres Kimball was right, and I believe history has proven him right. (This would require another 87 paragraphs . . .so, I’ll spare you all).
Thx for the great post, Kate.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Excellent and very thought-provoking post Kate! Personally, I’m very glad that I’ve moved from CA before we had to vote on Prop 8. It makes me nervous. Anyway, thanks for your post. It was really great.
September 8th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Kate, this is such a great post. As I’ve been following the current election, I’ve been thinking a lot about how Americans apparently value style over substance in politics, and how politicians typically oblige our preference by competing to see who can come up with the catchiest one-liner. There seems to be an obsession, among politicians and voters alike, to reduce “the opponent” to the smallest common denominator, to confine their entire identity to a single sentence, and thus make them defeatable and defeated.
This line from your post hits the issue on the head: “I combated pat lines with pat lines and poor logic with poor logic instead of trying to love and see.” I think that’s such a great sentiment, I think it’s something that we all do and that is happening all around me right now, and I also think you’ve named the solution: listening with open-heartedness and trying to understand what people are REALLY saying, limited as it may be by the reductive language of politics. When it comes right down to it, I really do believe that most of us have more in common than we have different.
September 8th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
The “watchman on the tower” perspective scares me. The watchman has been so completely dead wrong so many times with his foresight. I can think of very few times where his foresight has turned out to be correct. On the other hand, I can name many cases where his foresight has been wrong. For example: inter-racial marriage, ERA, civil rights, polygamy, homosexuality, etc. The prophetic power of past Mormon prophets has been adequately tested, and they have consistently failed the tests.
September 10th, 2008 at 3:00 am
I definitely feel your pain. We’ve only been to our new ward once, and already I’ve put myself on the defensive - constantly waiting for one of these problem issues to pop up so I can distingish myself from “the other” kind of mormons out there. I’ve actively avoided the kind of encounter you had at Coldstone just to make life easier and church-going less stressful. The result? I’m not getting to know anyone.
September 10th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
When discussing the mormon stance on same gender attraction, sites such as mormonsformarriage are often cited as an alternative mormon view. To be fair it seems that one should also cite the church’s sites as well.
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/public-issues/same-gender-attraction
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage
September 21st, 2008 at 8:48 am
Here’s a problem I have with the church getting involved with same-sex marriage and homosexuality in general. We are to accept the words of the prophet as the word of God. No argument is presented. We are simply expected to accept, whole-heartedly, the fact that homosexuality is an abomination and needs to be stamped out like a colony of cockroaches.
Read the statements the church puts forth. Is there any argument? Is there any reasoning? No. Their statements simply declare unsubstantiated dogmaticism. We are to accept that homosexuality is wrong simply because some guy claims that God says so. That may be enough for others, but I’ve seen the consequences of such dogmatic reasoning in the past. That’s the same sort of theological unilateralism has resulted in planes flying into buildings.
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:07 pm
I think it’s unfair to the Leadership of the church to say they will end homosexuality by “stamping it out like a colony of cockroaches.” I have never heard any Prophet or Apostles use any type of derogatory language or anything that resembles hatred or even violence. So it’s not fair for you to use it for them. They ask those who practice homosexuality to repent and abstain from it. Some members might be cruel, but that is not what is taught.
I probably wouldn’t compare the churches stances on what God says is right or wrong with those of 9/11. The LDS church does not teach violence and is not that extreme. I can see where you are coming from, but don’t buy the comparison
September 24th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Two words: aversion therapy.
September 24th, 2008 at 8:04 am
Also, I should note that I am not comparing the church’s stances on homosexuality to 9/11. If you read what I wrote, I am clearly saying that it is this same unquestioning dogmaticism that leads to such horrible atrocities like 9/11. The hijackers believed that they were doing God’s will. Why? Because someone they trusted told them so. That said, I honestly do not think that Thomas S. Monson is going to declare a fatwā anytime soon.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
I find this communication very interesting for members of the church. It reminded me of an old pamplet I found on my mission which was printed in 1980 explaining the equal rights amendment and why the Presidecy took its stand on the issue. Additionally it adressed the allowance for discent from the Prophet on the issue. I will quote the relevant parts. “It is clear, therefore that members who choose not to follow the councel of the First Presidency are free to do so. There is no civil or criminal penalty for relogoius disagreement, But there is surely a spiritual loss for the individual.
Recognising the significance of its councel to Church members, the First Presidency is extremely carefull in taking stands on any matter affecting the lives of members. Historically the Church has not tken possitions on strictly political questions, but has spoken out on moral issues.
The First Presidency “shall have power to dcide upon testemony according to the laws of the Church…For this is the hughest council of the Church of God, and a final decission upon contreversies in spiritual matters. There is not any person belonging to the Church who is exempt from this council of the Church. (d&c 107:79-81)
It is with this understanding that members of the Church recieve the councel of the First Presidency. But evin so members are free to choose for themselves….The relationship between prophets and members is not one of blind acceptance, contrary to some misunderstandings and misstatements, but rather places on the members the full responsibility to study and pray, so that each may also recieve confirmation from the Lord of the First Presidency’s position on the matter at hand……But what if an individual feels his “comfirmation” does not support the First Presidency statement? When the Apostle Paul was approached by members espousing their own interpretations, he resolved their dilema by asking: “You saith I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is christ divided? (1 cor. 1:12-13)………President George Q. Cannon commented upon the extent to which councel may be ignored or resisted: “A friend..wished to know whether we..considered an honest difference of opinion between a member of the church and the authorities of the church was apostacy…We replied that we had not stated that an honest difference of opinion between a member of the Church and the aurhorities constituted apostacy;…but we could not concieve of a man publishing those differenes of opinion, and seeking by arguments, sophistry and special pleadings to enforce upon the people to produce division and strife, and to place the acs and councels of the authorities of the church, if possible in a wrong light, ad not be an apostate, for such conduct was apostacy as we understood the term. We further said that while a man might honestly differ in opinion from the authorities through a want of understanding, he had to be exceedingly careful how he acted in relation to such differences, or the adversary would take advantage of him, and he would soon become imbued with the spirit of apostacy, and be found to fight aginst God and the authorities which He placed here to govern his Church (deseret News, 3 nov 1869, p. 457).
Anyway I Kept this pamplet when I found it on my mission and I hope you find it interesting. The pamplet is 23 pages long and signed by Spencer W. Kimball, N. Eldon Tanner, and Marion G. Romney