Gay marriage supporters vow to file second complaint over Mormon church's role in Prop. 8

The money war over Proposition 8 shows no signs of letting up.

Opponents of the measure, which banned gay marriage in California, said today that they plan to file a second complaint with the state alleging the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints deliberately did not disclose its financial contributions to the Yes on 8 campaign.

Californians Against Hate already filed one complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission, sparking an ongoing investigation of whether the church violated campaign finance laws. The church has repeatedly said it did not violate any rules and was not trying to hide how much the church gave.

Records released last month show the church donated about $198,000 to the Yes on 8 case.

“I’m calling this Mormongate,” Fred Karger, founder of Californians Against Hate, told the Associated Press. “I think there’s been a massive coverup.”

-- Shelby Grad

Comments

[Dave]

Clearly it was nonmonetary and they reported by the January 31st deadline like all other organizations. To me this looks like gay's intolerance and hatred against those that have different views. The election is over it would be nice if everyone could just get along.

[SFDR]

"Churches" that get to claim tax-exempt status should be held to the highest standard when it comes to ethics. For this cult to claim that they spent less than $2,000 before the initial investigation is a tribute to how much ego they have when it comes to circumventing government policies. Enough already. The State (and the Country) can use the money that has been kept off the books by organizations who claim tax-exempt status and yet interfere with the initiative process. If they interfere they are no longer a "church". Pay up. Now. And make it retroactive.

[jeffrey.hepler]

WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I can't force the people to validate my homosexuality! WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! WAHHHHHHHHH!!! I can't shred other peoples morals and values and replace with gay ones...WAHHHHH!!!!

Ideal solution: Cut California in half. Give the gays half, and we keep the rest. Then dynamite the borders of the gay half and let it drift in to the pacific. End of the gay insanity. I am so sick of these degenerates demanding an entire nation surrender to their depravity and make it equal to heterosexuality. Might as well legalize pedophilia if we give these mooches play time.

[Dropping By]

Why does the L.A. Times print every fundraising press release that this guy belches out? I'll be looking very forward to his public apology once the Church of Jesus Christ is cleared of any wrongdoing and the "No on 8" religious bigots like him turn out merely to have overactive imaginations. The Church has filed all its disclosures on time -- early in fact, as was amply documented last week, and earlier than its opponents -- so (once again) Mr. Karger's problem seems to be with the laws of the state of California which he is unable to tolerate.

[Dave]

I am Mormon, and I donated to the 'Yes' campaign. What the Californians Against Hate don't realize is that the Mormon church did not donate directly, rather its members donated directly. If the Mormon church had donated directly, you could have seen some really big time dollar amounts, because the church has those resources. Rather, the church chose to let their California members exercise their individual good judgment to support a measure which is in the best interest of mankind, both now and in the future.

[Pete Sommer]

Californians Against Hate...unless it's hating the Mormons. I see.

[Scy]

Of COURSE the Mormon Church lied. They encourage "lying for the Lord". The theory is, that if you are doing it for God, it's ok.

"Oh God hear the words of my mouth!" Repeated 3 times.

What bigots.

[tew]

Pretty ironic they call themselves "Californians Against Hate". How much anti-Mormon bigotry have they stirred up already? They demonize anyone that differs with their view and label their disagreement "hate".

[Pam]

To the comment posted by jeffrey hepler---I'm straight, but no way would I chose to live in a divided California with a pathetic homphobe like you! I'll take gays any time of the day...the gay people I know are smart, interesting and way better people than a creep like you could ever be. If you're so sick of it, I've got a better idea, get the hell out of California. We don't need weirdos like YOU in my state.

[Francis]

Yawn....didn't someone have 8 babies ? Now that's news...

[Todd]

I am gay and proud but I don't have the guts to publicly spew my hatred against all the black and Latino voters (which I do amongst my white gay partners) so I just blame it all on the Mormon church in Utah. They were the ones who voted. Hopefully we can destroy anyone who disagrees like scientology does.

[Rex Boone]

Hey, Dave, did you read jeffrey.hepler's comment? Would you label that as religious intolerance and hatred? My rights have been taken away by the people of California. Of course, I am going to be upset. And I am going to fight to get them back. To do anything less would be un-American.

[George Sutton]

This news article has done the readers a disservice. The Church complied with all reporting laws, state and federal. The Church donated "in-kind" to Proposition 8, in the form of reimbursement for travel expenses of its leaders, clerical time, etc.

The millions of dollars spent by members of the Church were just that, millions of dollars by members of the Church, who gave the money willingly and voluntarily. The Church did not coerce its members to donate anything, and no action was taken against members who did not donate or did not support the measure.

The news article was too one-sided in reporting one organization's uninformed opposition to the Church.

[Chingon]

Rex - The people voted. Respect the peoples voice. You claim your rights were taken away simply for the fact that activist judges made a decision last year that lasted for several months. With that you've latched on to this recent (read recent) decision that your rights were taken away. I don't recall your groups' claims to this right going back to the states founding until this recent decision. Your group is hell bent to scorch anyone in this state, or any state, who supported passage of Prop 8. Now who's the group hating here??? The people of California have spoken....

[Tommy D]

This is more about gays hating Mormons than anything else. It was blacks and Latinos that voted for Prop 8 by the millions. The Mormons had very little to do with it. Since it's politically incorrect to express displeasure with blacks or Latinos, gays are taking it out on Mormons. Pretty pathetic when you think about it.

[David Jay Patterson]

To my LDS brothers and sisters in Christ:

It is very difficult to be civil with folks making this kind of statement by Jeffrey Hepler: "Might as well legalize pedophilia if we give these mooches play time." But I will try to answer calmly and fairly. After all, folks on my side of this fight have said plenty of things that are appalling.

Anti-Mormon bigotry I am against completely. But that does not mean that I am going to give up on trying to get my rights back. I had the right to marry my partner for a few months. I lost that right on Election Day. The Mormons were, although far from alone, instrumental in that loss.

I am a Christian and and therefore commanded by my God to forgive my enemies. But I will fight peacefully and fairly until I take my dying breath. I will fight to get back my right to marry my partner.

To all who voted or supported Prop 8, I give you this message of peace: May God bless you all your days. I'll bet we agree on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, healing the sick, and all sorts of good works.

To my fellow GBLT and allies: May those of us on the No on 8 side who are unfair, unkind, or simply unreasonable try to channel our anger into righteous indignation.

To all of us: Yes, the election IS over. But the fight, which I pray will be peaceful, continues. I know that in my heart, I am right that Prop 8 stinks in the nostrils of the Almighty. I'm sure many reading this on the other side feel exactly the same.

So, what is the answer? Deliberation, forebearance, and sincere attempts to understand and forgive.

I will marry my partner one day. I hope folks who voted yes on 8 will re-focus their energy on all sorts of great stuff. The LDS has a proud tradition of good works on a huge scale, domestically and internationally. I pray that they use their energy to push those laudable efforts forward.

[bayhuntr]

Clearly following the law and announcing the extent of their financial involvement during the campaign was not done. Clearly there are Mormons who job is too comment on these boards to spin story's to hide just how slimy the Mormon church is. They took away peoples rights, I don't hate the Mormon church, I just have contempt for their self righteous, arrogant and characterless values. We are starting to educate the traditional "Christians," It doesn't take much to make them disgusted by Mormonism, once they learn the truth. If they show there disgust with laws against you, I'm sure you will hate it.

[Akiba]

What two consenting adults do in private is none of my business. If they want to marry, that is entirely their concern. It is simply a matter of live and let live. With world population approaching 7 billion they are deserving of some praise, though I may disagree with the gay outlook and philosophy. The same horde of bigots stuck us with prohibition, Sunday closing laws and the like. Again, it is a matter of live and let live. Putting a "forbidden" label on it is the quickest way to attract people.

[Don R]

Jeez people!! No one hates the Mormons and no one is being a poor sport. If blacks, women, and any other group who had their civil rights denied just rolled over and died (as I'm sure many of you wish we gay people would) rather than continue to fight for civil rights this country would still be stuck with slavery, voiceless women, and a whole host of other cultural tragedies. Come on... can't you see that we are just angry that this country does not afford us the same rights as anyone else? Opponents of Prop 8 will continue to fight, because civil rights belong to everyone... regardless of whether your religion supports us or not. In America, what is fair and just always prevails eventually. You can continue to try and use outdated arguments to justify discrimination, but history will see you looking foolish, archaic, and ignorant. Or you can simply evolve.

[No H8]

I love it how the oppressors are upset when those they seek to oppress object. How dare they! We, the oppressors are the real vicitims. Pity us poor Mormons. You gays have no right to object just because we have lead a movement to demonize gay Americans and your children and strip you of your rights.

Of course, in our world, gays who fight for their civil rights must then be guilty of discrimination.

Defn: Lies: When a religion sponsors ads that lie, it is bearing false witness. When a relilgious institution covers up its own political activities, it is bearing false witness.

Defn: Faith: When a church condemns anyone who does not believe as they do, it is faith.

Defn: Unthinkable hubris: When a church goes to Nazi concentration camp gravesites in 2008 to convert Jewish victims posthumously without anyone's permission, it is the height of the arrogant disrespect of other faiths.

I get it. I guess they are pious when it suits them. If they say it is in the name of their god then the ends justify the means.

[TD]

any use of the word 'hate' in slogans or naming is a bad idea. reading this page i can see that the hatred against gays is quite vehement but to use the word 'hate' is negative and a downer. how about calling themselves 'Californians for marriage equality'? that sounds so much nicer. Obama won by being a nice guy. some times nice guys do win.

i must say, though, that some of the posts here are quite negative. someone named jeffrey seems to have quite a lot of issues with homosexuals. maybe, over time, he can heal that. hope so.

[Accountable Joe]

The Mormons are such heroic defenders of the initiative as the ultimate expression of the public will.

Last week they were in federal court trying to exempt themselves from campaign finance reporting laws. They were tossed out on their rears by a federal judge.

But wasn't the law that created those campaign finance reporting requirements an initiative passed into law by the voters of California? Oyeah, how inconvenient...

I guess the 'people's will' is only valid when it suits the Mormons. And I guess the campaign finance reporting laws only apply to others, not to Mormons, until and unless they are caught.

They repeatedly failed to report their campaign contributions and in-kind activities until a complaint was filed. Then they went to court in an effort to exempt themselves from the disclosure laws.

Remarkable, how heroic they are...

[H_T]

What you define as "rights" some people define as "wrongs". Once you demanded that everyone accept homosexuality as a "lifestyle" you lost my vote. I was before that time a live and let live person. Now that you want to shove your view of whats "right" into my face...you loose my good will..

[Samuel Sukaton]

The Church has nothing to hide, as reprehensible as anti-8 advocates may find its actions. The Adventists, Catholics, and other churches also came out against 8 and funded (either individually or through related institutions.) Can y'all please go after them, too? I don't see any protests at the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, the Pacific Union Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, the Knights of Columbus.

See, this stream of protest is flowing out of angry at religious bigotry and is flowing into the river of anti-Mormonism that forced the LDS out to Utah in the first place.

Now, if you want to criticize Salt Lake, please turn your rhetorical guns elsewhere; Mormons aren't a majority in CA, and 8 passed by a majority. There were bigger (and dare I say, more powerful) interests funding and organizing this business. Stop it.

[bayhuntr]

Education... The Mormon president talks directly to the God of this planet (They believe in many Gods). When the president orders his people to donate to attack gays, it's a direct order from God. If they don't do what God tells you, you can't get a pass to go in the temple, if you don't go to the temple, you can't get to the top heaven.
Under their religion, the donation was not voluntary, it was mandatory. For that reason it should be counted as church money and the Mormon church should be taxed.

[chris rock]

Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and the Supreme Court will over turn it Soon. The rights of one group cannpt and shouldnot be voted away by an opposing group of fear mongering people ie Yes on 8 . The constitution of the United States grants Life, liberty and the persuit of happiness this is not exempt because a person is GAY vs STRAIGHT. The proper solution to this is to void and vacate prop 8.

[bornagainasgaythankgod]

Thank God for Fred Karger.

[Brent]

The Mormons feature the WORST kind of hatred: they profess to "love" you while taking away your human rights.

The fact they are linking homosexuality with pedophilia is equivalent to me linking Mormonism with Scientology.

After all, they are both cults, right?

[Jim]

Nothing like a Prop 8 post to bring out the lunatic comments. To once again speak to the inevitable specious reasoning that is cropping up (and can be expected to crop up again and again):

1) Fred Karger does not speak for the entire GLBT community. If he finds some evidence of wrongdoing, no doubt the community will rally behind him, but right now he's on a one-man investigative crusade. Please direct your objections to him, not me.

2) No, gays and lesbians are not going to go quietly back into the closet since we lost the election. Our rights have been violated. We're fighting back. If you want us all to just get along, grant us legal equality.

3) Homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia or bestiality. Children and animals cannot consent. Period. Any attempt to conflate them is just a sensationalist non-sequitur.

4) No, your rights have not been violated by gays and lesbians demanding to be treated as equals in the eyes of the law. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I of the California Constitution guarantee your right to be a bigot. You never had the right to impose your bigotry on others.

5) A domestic partnership does not, despite the best efforts of the legislature, provide the same rights, benefits, and responsibilities as civil marriage. There's no way it can, because of the way marriage law is written. Only using the same institution for opposite-sex and same-sex unions can result in equal treatment in the eyes of the law.

6) Yes, gays and lesbians actually DO have the right to be treated as equals in the eyes of the law. The California Supreme Court was unanimous on that front. The 5-4 vote that legalized same-sex marriage was split on whether or not the court had the authority to order same-sex marriages to be legal, not whether or not equality was required by law.

7) Homosexuality is not a choice. The only choice involved is whether to repress it and suffer the resultant mental illness, or to accept it and live a happy and stable life. Anyone who sincerely believes sexual orientation is chosen is most likely repressing their own homosexuality.

8) The Proposition 8 debate is over CIVIL marriage. Government may not take a stance on religious marriage.

9) If Proposition 8 is overturned, your church will still have every right to pick and choose whom it will marry. Until it is overturned, my church may not choose to marry a same-sex couple. Proposition 8 therefore violates my freedom of religion as well as my right to be treated as an equal in the eyes of the law.

10) If same-sex marriage really bothers you that much, the only other alternative open to you is to do away with civil marriage for everyone.

[Leon]

To "Rex Boone": Your rights have NOT been taken away. You have the right to marry any woman who will have you.

[David]

If we divided California into two states, one with gays and people tolerant of gays, and the other with those intolerant of gays, the former would get nearly all of the well-educated people and people who actually create value -- all of the good universities, the scientists, the academics, the technology industry, etc. etc. etc. The latter would become a desolate backwater. Even though I'm not gay, I too desperately wish this would happen. I'm sick of subsidizing the lifestyles of the hateful with my tax dollars.

[bayhuntr]

George Sutton's post is trying to deceive everyone. Mormon are expected to do what the president tells them because it is directly from god and they believe it. Only a liar would suggest that their "god" doesn't care if you ignore him! Mormon donation's would be voluntary, only if they believe their god is false.

[Timray]

I voted "NO" on Prop 8......i wish i could take it back....the "Gay" community has become simply disgusting

[Jim]

Leon, by your logic that "You have the right to marry any woman who will have you" then the Supreme Court erred in Loving v. Virginia in 1967 when it ruled that bans on interracial marriage are unconstitutional. After all, a white person could not marry a black person any more than a black person could marry a white person. That was "equal."

Are you proposing we go back to racial purity laws, because the majority in 1967 didn't approve of interracial marriage, and viewed the Court's decision as "judicial activism"?

[Eric Williams]

The Prop 8 people are spewing more hate than the LDS Church ever did, and they blame the church for being hateful, and anti gay. Most religions are anti gay. Don't single out the Mormon Church. The proposition lost, and I can guarantee that all the people who voted against it are not Mormons. So why don't all you Prop 8 folks drop this Mormon Church issure, and look at the big picture. The USA in general, is against gay marriages. Call it something else. Keep the word "marriage" between a man and a woman. Call it anything else. Use your imagination, and create a new word. Quit bashing the church as if they are the majority voters in this state.

[kristin]

This seems to be a frivolous complaint in the sense that it probably has no solid evidence behind it. We should pursue political fraud if there is solid evidence behind it. But this complaint seems to be based just on one person's gut feelings. It'll be a waste of taxpayer's money to investigate it.

[David Blackburn]

I think the Supreme Court will decide to no longer recognize marriages in California. They were pretty clear about this in their May, 2008 decision. Forcing opposite-sex couples to register as domestic partners would comply with with the Christian Right's statements that domestic partnerships are equal under the law.

[Dr. Peter]

EVERYBODY--please go back to the posting of David Jay Patterson above. He wrote the words right from my (and millions of my brothers and sisters) pen and body!
VERY RIGHT ON! David Jay---WE all thank you from our hearts.

[Mike]

I'd like to know how letting two people in love get married is "Shoving views of what's right in your face?" (H_T) If that's true, then you've stuck your nose where it doesn't belong...

It's a supreme irony that Prop 8 people campaigned on this idea we were "imposing morals" on everyone when the real "imposers" were everyone who tried to stop people in love from getting married because it went against their religious beliefs.

And "the people voted?" Sure they voted, after getting hit with scare tactics and anti-gay propaganda mostly financed by religious people. Before all that propaganda, Prop 8 was polling for defeat.

[Archangel]

To David Jay Patterson; you sir, submissive, pretend wife, trans-thing...whatever choice you play at are in fact NOT a "Christian" in any sense of your demented self-justified logic. You kind so conveniently omit one of The Christ's earliest qualifier statements which was; "I have come NOT to change the law..." In fact I have personally verified the NT translations directly from Aramaic, which dates to approx. 40-60 A.D. That's GOD's law He referred to, not yours or the law as you wish it to be.
God's law still forbids same sex, period! So, I suggest that you frame your sexual deviancy upon some other foundation and argument. Oh yeah, and learn some reading comprehension skills.

[kenner]

Well I guess I'll wear your hatred label as a badge of honor. I was personally behind over $1,000 for Prop 8. ,& I'm only a lowly carpenter!We raised money once,& we can do it again.Remember people are not afraid of the Pink Nazis

[pb]

Just remember this Californians: Get out that pocketbook and defeat Meg Whitman who is an LDS member. The LDS will spend a billion dollars for the Calif governorship if that is what it takes. They call the faithful and the faithful must obey to raise money for whatever cause the church hierachy deems worthy. The taxpayers pay for the minimum 5 kids each LDS woman must have and the church spends bazillions on its goal of ultimate power.

[jeffrey.hepler]

To Rex at 5:30pm

"Would you label that as religious intolerance and hatred?" - Odd..I didn't say a thing about religion. Hatred? Hmm. Who was it that took to the streets to intimidate voters? Who was it that tried to intimidate corporations into firing their employees over a "private" vote base on a donation that was done in their name, not a "corporation's" name? Who was jumping up and down on police cars? Who was stealing signs from lawns, buildings, and cars. Who tried to commit violence against senior citizens? I don't seem to recall Yes on 8 people doing any of these things. Seems to me the bigotry and hatred is all on your side.

Now who did not campaign effectively? Who assumed people who just go against their hearts and traditions just for gays? Wasn't us.

"My rights have been taken away by the people of California." Really? I don't recall taking the rights of Californians away in terms of marriage. Did I just take away the rights from the entire populace? Let me check............hmm nope. It says here I codified marriage as being recognized between a man and a woman. So technically you could marry a guy or a hamster if you wanted too. We just don't offer validation. So not sure what rights I took considering the California Family Code is still intact regarding benefits to non-traditional people such as yourself.

"Of course, I am going to be upset." - Upset over what? That we reject homosexuality and prefer not to have you destroy our culture and traditions with you attempt at mockery and fraud?

"And I am going to fight to get them back." We were waiting for that. If you really want a civil war......

"To do anything less would be un-American." To destroy the values, culture, and tradition of this country and forcing a majority to submit to a minority behavior thus redefining society against our will in a blatant attempt to equalize a sexual retardation with normal behavior is un-American. To assault the foundation blocks and the core philosophies of this great nation in a selfish attempt to undermine her to promote homosexuality when it stands rejected is un-American. You wouldn't understand what being an American is if it stood up and bit you in the ass. Here is a hint: Selfish acts of defiance isn't an American value.

[christina]

i really don't understand why people think that allowing homosexual couples to marry is harmful to their heterosexual existence. also, any arguments again gay marriage on the basis of "my morals/ethics/religion" need to remember the whole separation of church and state thing- it's kind of a big deal in america.

people are people. you can't label the entire mormon church, or the entire gay community as one thing or the other. there are people who love each other and want to be recognized as a married couple under the law- what's wrong with that?

[corntrader19]

David Jay Patterson: Don't call yourself a Christian if you are a homosexual. I am tired of the expresskon "gay Christian." There is not such thing. You are self-deceived. Jesus said "darkness and light can't occupy the same place." Jim: Homosexuality is not a choioce? That's not what the bible says (Romans 1:26)

[DanOLGB]

Proposed Amendment to the California Constitution - Protect the Religious Rights of the Deceased

"No organization may perform rites on behalf of or count among its membership a decedent without the written permission of the person or the executor of their estate."

[spoon]

These religious kooks have to start paying their taxes if they want to run a government of hate. The comments against homosexuals are pure bigotry.

[Joseph]

In the everyday lived reality, it would be very difficult to have the definition of an institution as enshrined by law not encroach upon the definition of an institution held by independent religious communities. By inscribing it in law, it gives one definition hegemony over others. It is not just about individual rights, it is about the official symbolic meaning attached to sexuality.

I personally want gay couples to have the dignity and rights they feel they deserve. I do not want them to feel disenfranchised in any way. But I also have an idiosyncratic belief system that I want to preserve and protect from policies that may undermine it in unforeseen ways.

The domestic partnership initiative seems to be the best solution. I will not ask my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to give up anything I will not give up. We can both have domestic partnerships, with equal benefits and recognition under the law, while each independent community can decide for itself what relationships they would like to symbolically sanctify through marriage ceremonies.

Since I am a Mormon, you would not adopt my philosophy of life and vice-versa, but let our difference result in an enriching recognition of both our uniqueness and common humanity. Let it not turn us into enemies who dismiss each other with superficial and inadequate caricatures. I hope and pray for both sides to compromise and see the each others concerns as legitimate and sincere. I pray that a win-lose can be turned into a win-win.

[bob]

As an ex-LDS member who forced the church to remove his name from the church rolls, I can personally attest to the hypocrisy of the LDS church. The following is very true even though it may come across as jest and ridicule.

Q. You know to stop a Mormon from drinking all your beer on a fishing trip?

A. Bring another Mormon

[bob]

As an ex-LDS member who forced the church to remove his name from the church rolls, I can personally attest to the hypocrisy of the LDS church. The following is very true even though it may come across as jest and ridicule.

Q. You know to stop a Mormon from drinking all your beer on a fishing trip?

A. Bring another Mormon

[Interested]

Marrriage is between a man and a woman. Threatening folks for their beliefs is criminal.

[Dave]

Don't these folks just sound like a bunch of sore losers?

[Jamal]

The blacks are getting sued next. We are hated also because we overwhelming regected gay marriage. What a joke-look who is intolerant. We vote to protect marriage and they call names. Well we must be doing something right!

[WakeWashington]

It's a shame the LA Times refuses to present this information in perspective, noting that the Mormons complied with filing requirements and that other organizations contributing much more to Prop 8 took exactly the same approach to filing disclosures.

Guess editors there are willing to sacrifice the paper's credability in order to campaign for gay marriage and deliberately smear a conservative religious group.

And with the recession slowing down advertising, what a fine moment they've picked to turn the LA Times into a joke among the conservative business people most likely to buy space in it or on its site.

They have no regard at all for reader and advertiser expectations of fairness. And they could care less about trashing a brand they have spent decades building.

[No H8]

The comment about traditional rights established since statehood is iinteresting. I have heard this argument many times from gay marriage opponents and it is an intriguing argument.

It implies the weight of history should preclude any civil rights progress since statehood. The argument is that nothing since the mid-1800's has or should change and that we should role back our laws to when California first became a state for the sake of 'tradition'. Obviously, while this sounds weighty, it is absurd.

Let's carry that argument to marriage laws which is how I have heard it referenced many times.

When California was admitted to the union, the marriage laws at that time considered women as property that had no vote and could be bought and sold. Is that the historical tradition they are reaching back to? Ah, the good old days on the plantation.

Perhaps it is the laws banning interracial marriage or those allowing discrimination against Blacks and Jews in real estate that these 'traditionalists' long for.

For all we know, it is.

It seems they have lost the argument about forcing their religion upon the rest of us and are now trying to force the individual precepts of their religion upon the rest of us.

They surely have the right to be bigots but they do not have the right to impose their bigotry on the rest of us.

I prefer how our laws have evolved and adapted. Inheritance, estate planning, medical powers of attorney, adoption, division of property, child custody, to name a few, are modern legal concepts that did not exist when California entered statehood.

It is time to update the concept of marriage. Many of our Western Allies already have. We are falling behind as a society.

[Robert]

Man, I love these articles! This guy has no idea how much publicity he's giving the Mormon's. Keep it up buddy! The more you build up your opponent, the greater they become. Ha ha!

[Owen]

You religious, I mean bigoted cultist, started this mess, so take your medicine like the men you purport to be. Mormon morals seem to be to hate everyone that isn't a mormon. You can all go back to that hateful place Utah and praise your Joe Smith, keep your women out of your temples, force your children to go on missions, and leave California to those of us who enjoy a diverse population free of hatred.

[thomasAlex]

Civil Rights have no place in the peoples hands. Our Country is a democracy to prevent the tyranny of the majority.

[Anon]

Clue time. Marriage has never ever been a right. It has always been a civil and often also a religious contract. Marriage has always had limits placed by both civil and religious authorities on who could and could not marry.

That being said, if homosexuals can "claim the right" to marry, then the same lobby should be in favor of polygamy and all other "non-standard" marriages. After all a "right" must be universally applied or it's not a right.

So, to the "No on 8" fanatics, don't lie about what is a right and what is not, and do not try to push your "rights" when you most certainly are going to say "no" to polygamy etc. Oh, and don't lie about what the Mormon church did with regard to campaign finance. Ah well, why should you stop with one lie when you can trot out as many lies as your hate filled minds can dream up. You are pitiful.

[Miya]

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and we DO NOT hate the people who are gay. We don't agree with what they believe in, but that doesn't mean that we HATE those people who are gay.

We STRONGLY believe that marriage is sacred and is to be performed between man and woman in order to create the family unit.

Plus, the Californians who are member of the Church DONATED their OWN MONEY to Yes of Proposition 8, NOT THE CHURCH ITSELF!

Please, we did not do anything secretive behind the law of the campaign. We simply put in money to support what we believed in and that is that.

[Steve45]

How about let's just settle down now, and obey the state law. No more gay marriage.

[Steve45]

Next time the opportunity comes up for a vote, and no doubt it will, after what we've witnessed in the media, the anti-gay marriage coalition will have far more financial support. The media in my native state (CA) has done a wonderful job exposing just how huge of a threat gay marriage may be to the nation. I'm a member of the Mormon Church, but I've lived in the Midwest for 22 years. Most members (13M, not just the 800,000 living in CA) have now realized how much people in CA need our financial support (only because of the media blitz), and most of us (not just a minority) will contribute financially next time around. My $500 is just waiting. Our church leaders did not suggest we in the Midwest (or anywhere else in the world except in CA) support Prop 8. Now they wouldn't need to.

[Steve45]

I have a question. I don't know where to make my financial contribution against gay marriage the next time around. My church (Mormon) didn't tell us where to make contributions. If someone is out there who can tell me, please, I need your help. Thanks.

[Barbara Tanzer]

The hate posts here are horrifying.

How does anyone even pretend to reconcile them with the teachings of Jesus?

Matthew 22:39.

Matthew 7: 2 through 5.

[Barbara Tanzer]

If you are for equal rights for all people, please donate to the Human Rights Campaign so that this hate-mongering can be fought.

https://secure.ga3.org/03/join2

[UVA Fan]

There is hope for this country when a state as blue as California votes in the majority for upholding traditional marriage between a man and a woman. God bless America and let's pray for strength for those who stand up for what is right and of good virtue.

[Dan]

Jim you do realize that the exact same logic can apply to multiple other laws on the books that are completely acceptable. Polygamy, Marriage of Brothers/Sisters (incest), they all can be relationships of consenting adults.

[Joe Smith]

The Mormon Church is its members. The church will take credit when its members do good works for society and yet they will distance themselves from the very same members when bad PR follows them. The Mormon Prophet told all the members in each chapel to "Do all they can and give of their means". Good Mormons do not disobey their prophet. So they did as the Prophet of their Church directed them.

The Mormon church was more then happy to let their members pay 20 million dollars out of their own pockets, during this horrible recession, while Mormon Corporation only paid $190 thousand. They tell their members to jump and the members ask "How High?"

The History of the LDS church is to first LIE, then spin the lie if that does not work then claim persecution. Mormons love to talk about how persecuted they are and yet they make BILLIONS of dollars a year. Poor Poor Mormon. Everyone is so mean the them. It is amazing who members will take the blame for the churches prophets and not hold him responsible.

CULT!

[Scott]

We reveal our bias as much by what we don't say as by what we do. Rather than merely circulating and lending credibility to allegations/publicity stunts, why not look at the contribution report timeline from 30 Jul 2008 to 30 Jan 2009 at www.newsroom.lds.org? Anyone interested in the truth could easily verify the timeline with the CA Secretary of State's office. Will we get a follow-up report highlighting Fred Karger's disingenuous game: Californians "Against Hate"?...somehow I doubt it?

[JohnnyGreen]

I love byhunters comment. God toled us to? if we don't do what he says we cant go into the temple? You really dont know us do you? If we did not vote a certain way we still retain membership.
The church field the necessary paperwork as per requirement. The California Secretary of State, Department of Elections and the Registrar-Recorder for Los Angeles. Whats interesting is not all of this material is posted on the Secretary of States web site. Why is that?
What is really sad are the Unions that donated to this cause. Their members did not have a choice. The FOTF group donated how many million to this cause and they are a non profit? Why is the LDS church getting ALL the negative press? Could it be that the news papers know this and it will drive people like you and me to their web sites where click traffic will increase. Throw a little spin in the facts and look at all the people coming to your site!
The investigation on the church was perfect timing. You file the investigation against the church knowing they have intell jan 31 to file all the necessary paperwork then turn around and say "see? you see they did not file all the paperwork as they should have" Perfect timing
The web sites that the gay people have put up telling everyone where the people live if they donated to prop 8. That will do it. This is only going to make you look like sore losers. New Business will start propping up. Want to know how your employee voted in the last election? I can see it now, If i want to hire someone i go to this site, look at the way the person voted the last 4 years and make a judgment call if i want to employ this person.
Prop 22 then prop 8 and in time there will be another prop but this time I will vote differently because of the actions i keep on seeing. Good Luck

[TomH]

Where are reasonable gay advocates and responsible media?

Mr. Kargar’s premise is that the LDS acted illegally and unethically because the Church did not file all its donations to the Yes-on-8 campaign, or did not file them on time. He claims there is a cover up since the amount reported was smaller than what some gay activists claimed it should be. He also claims that the lack of reporting sparked an investigation into the LDS Church. However, the evidence shows that all of Kargar’s premises don’t match the facts.

Most gay advocates, straight, gay, or lesbian, are unaware that the LDS Church does not have paid clergy and its volunteer members are heavily involved in the management of the Church at the local level. They are probably also not aware that nearly all LDS Church members serve actively in their local congregations donating several hours a week to teaching and serving others in and outside the Church. So, for some of the Church members to redirect their efforts and spend time on the Yes-on-8 campaign, was no large task.

It is no secret that the LDS Church was the most organized or mobilized quickly responding to the Church’s call to defend traditional marriage. This represents the long tradition and nature of LDS Church structure in responding to many causes including bringing aid to victims of natural disasters or other community projects. It takes only a few phones calls to mobilize a large and ready LDS service group, to their credit.

Media sources and, in this case, Fred Kargar assumed that since the response from California LDS members was so well organized and so mobile, that more money “MUST” have been spent to bring that result about. However, this assumption is based on his experience with other organizations and Churches and not upon the LDS Church’s structure and responsive ability.

Kargar makes further errors when he claims that the LDS Church initially reported “only” $2000 in donations, but then was forced to report all of its donations of $198,000, after an investigation was sparked. (All of the LDS Church’s donations were non-cash donations.) Again, Kargar is wrong. Where are the investigative reporters on this one?

Campaign laws require report filings be made by specific deadlines for specific time periods. These reports are then made public by the California Secretary of State. Recently, the LDS Church responded to these false accusations by stating:

• The Church filed seven contribution reports throughout the campaign. Earlier donations were filed for specific time periods prior to this last reporting period, as required by law.
• Reports were required to be filed in different ways: by mail, fax or electronically.
• All filings went to the California Secretary of State, the Department of Elections for the City and County of San Francisco, and the Registrar-Recorder for Los Angeles. The electronic filings were sent directly to the Secretary of State but copies were mailed to all three locations.
• The Church has no control over what filings are posted on the California Secretary of State’s Web site. Currently, not all the Church’s filings are posted.
• The Church’s donations were all in-kind and included travel expenses, compensated staff time and audiovisual production services.
• The value of the Church’s in-kind (non-monetary) contribution is less than one half of one percent of the total funds (approximately $40 million) raised for the “Yes on 8” campaign.
Now, comes the really interesting part. The LDS Church filed its first report of its in-kind donations to Prop 8 on JULY 30, 2008. Here’s the astonishing part, the amount was $19,831!

(You can see all of the reports here: http://www.newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/media-reports-on-proposition-8-filing-uninformed)

How can Kargar’s claims be seriously considered, when he has failed to include the LDS Church’s first report filed on time? The Church’s first report was more than the Kargar’s claim of a mere $2000 donation – indeed the unreported difference was over $17,000 dollars!

Sadly, what is going on here is much more sinister than poor investigative journalism. Some gay advocates and the media are attempting persecute and punish the LDS Church and its LDS members for voting against gay marriage (voting their conscience – a very American thing to do.) We all see it – from the boycotts to the media reports.

Those involved in this smear campaign are setting a very unethical precedent, one that is sure to backfire when citizens learn the whole truth. Worse, what principle will they call on when those against gay marriage use the same tactic in the future? How will they “cry foul” without resorting to the worst form of hypocrisy?

My call is to reasonable, honorable, and truthful gay advocates to demand the truth, and to firmly reject accusatory journalism based on the biases of a few disaffected people.

[Jim]

This is my impression of this comment line:

Gays started it!
Nuh-uh! Mormons started it!

You're a H8ter!
No, YOU'RE a hater!

You're a b!got!
No, YOU'RE a bigot!

The accusers are the accused. The bigots are bigoted. When you disagree on the fundamentals of the issues, of course you're going to argue the same points at each other. You might as well be arguing in a mirror. No one is going to convince anyone, especially with language like that.

Now for my two cents. I'm not concerned. The Mormon church bureaucracy is more highly efficient than any government position, and very skilled at maintaining the letter of the law. There will be no evidence of a cover-up because there was no cover up. Fred Karger simply can't get his mind around the idea of 'volunteering.' He can't understand how people would be motivated to participate in a cause he finds loathsome, so he reacts the only way he knows how: publicly. This line of action, however, will only be a dead end, and will not discourage Mormons from donating/participating in the inevitable future debates about the nature of marriage.

[Jim]

Dan, my question stands. On any logic that claims that consenting adults may not enter into a civil marriage if a narrow majority of society does not approve, would also mean that racial purity laws are also OK so long as the majority votes for them. What's the difference?

Yes, in California this could extend to consenting adult relatives (who may consent to sexual activity) or to consenting adult polyamorous relationships (which is significantly less likely, since the two-person structure of civil marriage would be useless to them and would require another institution -- much like I wouldn't start a business as a sole proprietorship if what I need is a joint venture). The fact that these relationships make you say "ick" is not a legal reason to prevent them. Here's why:

1) In California, civil marriage is a civil contract that has nothing to do with sex. These people are free to have sex whether you like it or not. A sister can conceive a child with her brother. A woman can have nine men all sharing her sexually. This is all perfectly legal. Similarly, a married couple can be completely platonic, and marriage is not considered consent to sexual activity in California. Banning marriages you don't like does nothing to prevent immoral activity or to encourage moral activity.

2) Religious marriage remains a completely separate institution. Any church is free to refuse to perform a marriage it finds immoral. The church, not the government, is the correct moral compass for society.

3) If we DO have the authority to outlaw that which makes a narrow majority say "ick," what's to prevent us from then turning that against you? Requiring that you stop teaching your children to be anti-gay, for example, and removing the child from your home "for the benefit of the child"? Ordering churches to stop preaching against homosexuality? All OK under the doctrine of "majority rules morality." That "tyranny of the majority" is the whole reason why the states refused to ratify the U.S. Constitution without the promise of the Bill of Rights, and it's why the California Constitution has Article I. If you want to be free of me imposing my morals on you, I must be free of you imposing your morals on me. That is the very basis of civil rights.

[Jim]

I feel I should point out that several major Christian churches support marriage equality. The United Church of Christ is the oldest (this isn't some freak little religion, either, it's the modern descendant of the Pilgrims). There's also the Unitarians and the Episcopalians. There are numerous smaller denominations that do as well, and perhaps some major ones I've overlooked.

We have as much right to the word "Christian" as any of you. You may disagree with us theologically, but I challenge you to stand beside me on judgement day and see who is in the right before God instead of trying to impose your incorrect interpretation of the Bible on me.

[Carolyn]

Let's get this straight. Your upset because the Church used it's own money??? You have a problem with this because?

You went behind the backs of California voters to have a vote overturned? Because why???

You are no better than anyone else if you should decide to stay in the closet it is fine by me....

If you do get the marriage vote overturned in your favor do me an the rest of us a favor and SHUT UP!

It is really logical that you were not meant to be together. Our bodies were meant to join together as Man And Wife and for some reason you can't seem to get that through your thick heads.

Get on with your life. Go away.

[Chuck]

To "Rex Boone".... Your rights to marry the person you love has been taken away... if you love someone of the same sex.

You, Your Friends, Your children (if any) have all LOST their rights.

[Chuck]

First the Homosexuals, then the African-Americans, then the Japanese-Americans, then the Chinese-Americans, then the Hispanic-Americans, then... then... then..

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Seems like the same thing as the German's in the 1930's and 40's.

[Torrance]

I'm amazed at how many uneducated people have computers.

[Bill]

As a gay man, I am not allowed to fully participate in our society. Therefore, I shouldn't be paying as much in taxes. It amazes me that heteros can divorce, which is what is REALLY killing the insitution of marriage. Why are we not outlawing divorce, which is a NEW testament sin.? Even heteros who slice people up can still get married. All of that makes the institution of marriage as it stands a joke.

[Melanie]

Shame on those who comment outside their league. Earn the right to comment:- Note if you do not qiualify keep your inordinately innate penmanship to your shameless selves.

Now if you can get past your fear of what you may find out about yourself, look to your left and then look to your right. At work, in your congregation, at the market, in the movies, at your CPA's office, At you kid's school, at the Post office, at the fedex couter, in the bank, at the gas station, in the elevator, at the resort, and the golf club, at the ski store, on the slopes, at the pool, in the dentist waiting room, while you are aving an MRI ..i could go on....

Chances are if the person to your left is not gay then the one to your is! All Americas deserve the same rights. Grow up and stop the fear.

[David]

In honor of Charles Darwin's recent 200 yr. birthday, let's consider this issue in light of natural selection and evolution. While I don't support the notion that evolution disproves God's existence, it does shed some light here.

The fundamental principle underlying evolution's validity is that all life forms gradually assume features which make it more compatible with its environment. These key survival features coalesce to form species capable of passing its features on to future generations.

To observe a living species's features is to observe principles of existence and life. Surely, God reveres such features just as He reveres life.

Now, the Earth has existed for 4.5 billion years according to scientists. One thing is clear--there has never emerged a complex species which is founded on, and perpetuated through, same-sex union.

In only the most recent couple of decades, mankind has applied its intelligence to challenge the innate instinct to reject such unions. This so-called intelligence has labeled this instinct as bigotry. However, by accepting same-sex unions into our civil codes, mankind celebrates a "feature" of humankind which has NEVER shown to be viable enough to sustain any complex species.

This "feature", which was once limited to the realm of genetic inheritance, has now become ingrained into our culture as a rightful form of human "expression". IMHO, this form of expression has way too much in common with principles of non-existence and extinction of species. I vote for life.

[Jim]

David, you write, "In only the most recent couple of decades, mankind has applied its intelligence to challenge the innate instinct to reject such unions."

I suggest you research history a little more thoroughly. There are historical precedents for same-sex marriage going back thousands of years. And, yet, somehow, the human race has continued to survive. Clearly this is not a feature that is evolutionarily disadvantageous.

[Joseph Smith]

That putrid cult needs to have its tax-exempt status revoked.

[jeffrey.hepler]

To: thomasAlex | February 11, 2009 at 11:28 PM

Your comment:

"Civil Rights have no place in the peoples hands. Our Country is a democracy to prevent the tyranny of the majority."

I see you failed political science 101. Allow me to assist. The ballot initiative in California allows for "direct" democracy. The legislature, House of Reps, and the Senate are a "Representative" Republic.

So now that I explained the difference, you can review your statement and see the contradiction.

That being said, homosexuality is not an American tradition. Male/female relationships are. And last on youtube I was given a reason why gay marriage should be allowed. His source? Shudo.

Now I said before in another article, that homosexuals want marriage for one reason: Validation. Once that validation occurs (by force no less) the next attack on our society is on the age of consent laws. Every nation that has allowed homosexual marriage is under assault by gay groups to eliminate the age of consent rules. Why? Since homosexuals are not exactly a dime a dozen, they need a feeding ground where they can hunt. They tried this with the boy scouts if every one remembers. They need a safe place to approach young male children and entice them into homosexuality. They can't breed. There are no replacements to satisfy their lust and depravity that can arrive quickly. So they need to "convert". Now the homosexual will tell you this is not true and they have no interest in young boys. However, every gay I know always references Shudo. Gay, pedophile, Samurai from the 17th and 18th century.

So we either keep the deviants where they belong, out of marriage. Or we allow them to desecrate marriage and commence their assault on our children and become a nation of pedophiles running rampant. Probably explains why Sheriff Hutchinson wants to do away with the concealed weapons law. Take away our ability to render some justice.

[David]

Hi Jim, whatever experiments have been conducted over the years, the result is clear--it did not stick. We would not be having this discussion if the result were otherwise.

What is clearly unprecedented is the current level of societal acceptance of same sex union. And this shift in attitude is coming at a time when we've gained unprecedented access to the human genome. We are within reach of being able to willfully set our own genetic makeup, including sexual preference!

What will our children choose? Hint: They will make choices consistent with the moral and social attitudes of the day.

The homosexual choice is doomed to ultimate failure, one need look no further than Darwin's 'Origin of Species' for the evidence. I don't want my children and grandchildren to get caught up in the deception. I vote for life!

[nessa]

This is beyond ridiculous! Great, you funded something that will eventually get turned over. Religion is SEPARATE from State... when in the hell are people going to understand this? I fought with my mom on this issue- she thinks that Catholicism needs to be taught in every school... mind you, she's 60, mentally unstable, and doesn't understand laws or rights of America even though she was born here. Did I mention that she also wants my brother to be the "Pope for America?"

Now, don't you think it's also crazy that people think that their religious beliefs should affect others that may have OTHER beliefs? I'm oh so sorry that people who donated to this prop8 crap are on the radar- afraid of receiving hate mail or not getting any business won't even come close to the pain that the Gays and Lesbians have suffered. Do you think it was worth it using your children on the sides of the streets to hold up signs they know NOTHING about? "Hold this sign up, or you won't get ice cream little Jim!"

Oh my God, I think my brain just popped.

[bayhuntr]

Wow. Nothing more freaky then arrogant people with the intellect of monkeys. "You're not a Christian, I'm a Christian" "My interpretation of the bible is right yours is wrong", "What I choose to read in the bible is important, your isn't" "You're not a Christian if you're not Mormon!" (...Oh, wait! they only say that in private.) "You didn't loose rights, you can marry opposite sex just like us!" ...yes, and left handed people can write with their right hand, idiot.

For those dim wits that keep saying "why us, we're only 2%?", it's not the Mormon vote, it was the money, over 40% of all anti gay donations came from Mormons.

Finally, Mormons that say their donations are voluntary, BS! Mormons believe their God talks through their profit and your profit told all active Mormons through a letter read at all Mormon service that God wanted them to donate time and money to attack gays. Because they believe this garbage and Mormons do, you can no more refuse his command to give then you could ignore his command to condemn gays.

What the Mormons will say next is a standard talking point "You obviously don't know anything about Mormons" Yes I do.

[bayhuntr]

David, What if, through evolution, having a small percent of the species not devoted to breading and rearing offspring, benefited the group by creating better ways to survive? I don't know, I just know we are here. You seem to know exactly what happened, so please let us in on your deep understanding of science. Not! You insult human reason, science and Darwin.

[AJ]

Why are you blaming the Mormons? They represent only 2% of the registered voters in California. They didn't pass Prop 8 by themselves.

[More No H8]

I completely and totally reject your religion. There, I said it.

You have a right to your religion. I, however, have an equal right to be free from your religion and from any religion at all should I so choose.

Yes, we can be happily godless and entitled to all rights of citizenship. I don't need your religious approval. You can keep it. It means nothing to me.

That is a core tenant of our American civil society. You have no right to impose your religious beliefs on me -- even via the ballot box.

We do not follow the bible and are free to completely ignore and reject it. Instead we follow the constitution. It and it alone is the highest law of our land.

It is designed to protect a minority from the tyrrany of the majority, in particular a religious majority.

You can take your religion and do what you will in the privacy of your own home. But don't flaunt it in public. It's disgusting and makes me uncomfortable.

[Curiouser and curiouser]

Curious and ironic.

Mormons -- notorious for polygamists and forcing young underage girls into arranged exploitive marriages to old men -- think they have credibility to be lecturing anyone about marriage.

[jeffrey.hepler]

To: Jim | February 12, 2009 at 03:35 PM

Historical precedence? Ok. Make yourselves into Eunechs per the precedence and we have a deal. Also, FYI, everything else suggests that "partnerships" were the order of the day in the past, not marriages. But I am ok with you becoming eunuchs for "marriage". When in Rome......

[Persecuted Mormon]

As a child, I often wondered how people could be so mean to another group like the Mormons, my ancestors, such that they would burn them out of their houses, tar and feather them near death, steal their property and revile continually against them. Now, unfortunately, I can see how hate groups (gay promoters) persecute those who LEGALLY AND LAWFULLY disagree with their positiosn on a key and fundamental issue -- marriage. You are all led around by the nose by the devil. I truly feel sorry for you. You people are so full of hate, it's scary. It's hypocritical. the Mormons didn't do this by themselves. You lost the vote!! You lost it fair and square, and ACORN wasn't even involved in the vote counting!! The Catholics and Baptists were involved opposing gay marriage too. Your focus on LDS Church is another testament to me of it's truthfulness and taking the high-road.

[Melissa]

Education:
Mormons believe in multiple Gods the same way any other Christian does: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. We just believe they are separate instead of one.
2. We believe the prophet speaks with God. However, we value individual choice and revelation as well. This means that, except for serious sins, they never even ask on most things( prop 8 being one that was hardly mentioned in church outside of CA). They leave it up to your personal judgment. It's between you and God.
Any one who donated did so entirely of their own choice. There was never ANY possibility of loosing the ability to go to the temple or any other repercussion for not donating.

Stop spreading lies to make the Mormons look bad.

thought number 2
it isn't about religion. It's about a set of values that the majority of society has accepted and wants to keep. Yes religions got involved because they also have these values, but the truth is that the people, not just the churches, believe that marriage should be between man and women.

thought number 3:
it isn't about rights. The gay community lost no rights. They lost a vocabulary word that they had for a few months. Perhaps a vocabulary word with social significance, but none-the-less, a vocabulary word. As far as I'm aware, they still have visitation rights, fair housing and employment rights, etc. They just can no longer call themselves married. While the constitution allows us the privilege of seeking happiness, it doesn't guarantee the "right" to call it whatever we want.

[Jim]

jeffrey.hepler, I am not aware of anywhere in the world that a gay/lesbian group is working to undo age of consent laws. I am only aware of MBLA, which is not a gay group, it is a pedophiliac group. Homosexuality and pedophilia are different sexual orientations. If you can cite sources for your claim, please do so, because I'm not finding any evidence to support it.

And, just to be clear, you believe gays should be castrated?

[TB]

The LDS church has the right to encourage its members to be good and to influence their communities for good. The Church encourages its members to strengthen the traditional concept of families, which includes preserving marriage between one man and one woman. I am grateful to belong to a Church that preserves families.

[Jim]

TB, your church does, in fact, have the right to encourage such things. It does not, however, have the right to write its version of morality into the law for everyone.

[bayhuntr]

The moderator lets jeffrey.hepler say all sorts of things including wanting gays castrated, then you block my response to him?
Melissa blatantly lies about their multiple God's and you block my response again?
Did a Mormon take over as monitor?

[Jim]

I, too, have had responses to "Melissa" and "Persecuted Mormon" that I did not feel violated community standards that weren't posted. I'm curious what the standards are.

[Kent Parsons]

After recently filing its final report on donations to the ProtectMarriage.com coalition, the LDS Church has found itself needing to clarify erroneous media coverage on its contributions.

Meeting a Jan. 31 campaign-filing deadline to report its contributions — all of which were non-monetary — to the ProtectMarriage.com coalition, the Church detailed in-kind donations totaling $189,903.58 as expenses that helped pass California's Proposition 8.

Proposition 8 is the November 2008 ballot measure that amended that state's Constitution as recognizing marriage as only between a man and a woman.

In-kind expenses included travel expenses – such as airline tickets, hotel lodging and car rentals. About half of the total contribution was reported as "compensated staff time."

In a Feb. 2 statement, the Church emphasized that its in-kind contribution was less than one-half of 1 percent of the total funds raised for the "Yes on 8" campaign — estimated to be some $40 million — and that it did not make any cash donations.

The statement also sought to clarify or correct erroneous media reports — that the final donation totals were greater than what was initially stated, that previous reports were erroneous and that the filings were not prompted by an investigation by California's Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reminding that many organizations were filing the necessary public records at the same time to meet the mandated deadline, the Church said it was merely complying with California law and in no way was being prompted by any investigation.

Also, previous donation disclosures were made by the Church throughout the campaign period to meet earlier deadlines and covered shorter, previous reporting periods. Media outlets were incorrect to compare the Church's previous, period-specific donations to its final report and suggest discrepancies between reported amounts or that the Church had ever misstated its amounts previously.