Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
Politics and Religion
The Church, the Senate, and Same-Sex Marriage

The Church, the Senate, and Same-Sex Marriage

Last updated on: November 22, 2022 at 11:09 am by Dan Peterson

The Church, the Senate, and Same-Sex Marriage 2022-11-22T11:09:38-07:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The United States Capitol at Washington DC (Wikimedia Commons public domain photo)

As many of you are no doubt aware, about a week ago the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released a statement regarding current federal legislative efforts to frame a bill regarding same-sex marriage: “Statement on the United States Congress Respect for Marriage Act”

Now, in response to overwhelming public demand — or, to put it another way, because a friend dropped me an email several days ago, suggesting that I comment on the subject in my blog — I am finally prepared to post a response to the Church’s statement.

Full disclosure: I opposed the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex unions. To my mind, to cite just one among many reasons for my opposition (I don’t intend to re-legislate this matter here, having too little time and energy for the task and seeing no real use in it), marriage pre-dates the state and is more fundamental than government, which means that the state lacks the standing and the authority to impose a virtually total redefinition of it on us. As I think I mentioned several times when same-sex marriage was still a live issue, Abraham Lincoln was once asked how many legs a dog would have if we redefined its tail as a leg. “Four,” he replied. “Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.”

That said, I was not unsympathetic to concerns among homosexuals and I favored the idea of creating a category of “civil unions” that would grant most if not all of the legal rights and privileges to homosexual couples that heterosexual marriages then enjoyed.

However, with its 2015 ruling in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges the Supreme Court of the United States made such matters moot by a vote of 5-4. Furthermore, although I’m inclined to sympathize with the position of Justice Clarence Thomas, expressed in his concurring opinion in the recent Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, that Obergefell was wrongly decided, I see no realistic prospect of delegitimizing same-sex marriage at this point. Even more importantly, at this late date, I don’t regard such a move as even desirable. The fight over same-sex marriage is water under the bridge. I strongly agree with the view of David French on the matter: “Why I Changed My Mind About Law and Marriage, Again: Walking through my flip, flop, flip on one of the toughest issues of our time.” (You’ll probably need to register in order to read the entire article, which is — as David French’s essays usually are — quite good. Happily, registration is free of charge.)

I expect that the leadership of the Church also views the debate over same-sex marriage as water under the bridge. Which is vitally important, in my opinion, for understanding the Church’s recent statement on the topic. Some on the cultural/political left have rejoiced in what they hopefully regard as the Church’s impending abandonment of its disapproval of same-sex marriage. Some of them look eagerly forward to the day when, as they feel, same-sex couples will be sealed for time and eternity in the Church’s proliferating temples. Others, elsewhere on the left, see it as yet one more redundant demonstration of the falsehood of the Church and the craven cowardice and/or mendacity and/or self-aggrandizing motivation of Church leaders, who, they say, will change (and have in fact changed) every foundational belief, claim, and practice of the Restoration in order to preserve their wealth and power. Or some such thing. Still others, located on the theological and cultural right, see the factual situation basically in the same way but lament it, declaring the prophets and apostles apostate cowards who are leading us straight into the arms of Babylon and the embrace of depraved immorality.

Both sides are quite plainly wrong.

It shouldn’t be overlooked that the official Church statement expressly and forthrightly declares that “The doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints related to marriage between a man and a woman is well known and will remain unchanged.”

What has changed is what I’ve outlined above: Whatever church leaders and I might have preferred, legal recognition of same-sex marriage is now a fait accompli in the United States and in many other countries. And it’s not a matter only of legality but one of a rapid and dramatic sea-change in popular opinion. The public now overwhelmingly supports same-sex unions. (See here and here for two almost randomly-chosen examples.) There can be no real point anymore in fighting a divisive and obviously futile battle over an issue that has been decided.

The Brethren are focused, though, on the preservation of religious freedom, both for our own church and for other faith communities. And, quite accurately, they see religious liberty as under siege. (See, for example, here and here and here.). And a major factor in that siege is the ascendancy of an LGBTQ+ movement that has rolled from victory to victory and that is clearly ambitious for, as it were, further territory. The leaders of the Church are trying to preserve the rights of groups that dissent from the rising orthodoxy on gender issues. And they seek to do it not through strife and noise and a never-ending cultural war, but through honest, mutually respectful conversation, seeking common ground and compromise. This, too, has been a major focus of speeches over the past several years by a number of the General Authorities, perhaps most notably by President Dallin H. Oaks. See, for example,

“A Mormon Perspective on Religious Freedom” (First Things, March 2016)

“President Oaks calls for a ‘peaceful resolution’ to the conflicts between religious freedom and nondiscrimination” (LDS Church News, November 2021)

“Religious rights ‘cannot be absolute,’ LDS apostle Dallin Oaks says, in call for a global movement: Church leader speaks at Notre Dame forum near the Vatican.” (Salt Lake Tribune, July 2022)

In my view, this National Review article by David Wilde, a Latter-day Saint student at the law school of the College of William and Mary, in Williamsburg, Virginia, might be helpful for those who seek to understand the Church’s position:

“Understanding the Mormon ‘Approach’ to Gay Marriage: There are problems with the ‘Respect for Marriage Act.’ But the LDS method for confronting social issues has some merits”

And so will this, from Meridian Magazine:

“The Art of Skewing Church Statements”

Posted from Moab, Utah

Politics and Religion

Uncategorized

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Previous Post

November 20, 2022

Humor in Heaven?

Next Post

November 22, 2022 The Colorado Springs Shooter and the Church

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which prophet's book names the birthplace of the Messiah?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Micah Jonah Amos Obadiah