To love, Honor, and not Obey

Does the church have a right to believe gays should not be allowed to be married? Here we hinge on belief versus action. When belief itself is rooted in discrimination, when only LDS members will “go to heaven” (or go to run a planet as its god), that belief is simply a prop to maintain church exclusivity.

There is a blindness to the fact that hate comes from belief, and that the action of hate crime, comes out of that exclusivity and disdain for those not following your own path of exclusion.

My first problem with the Mormon church was when I received no answer regarding the passage in the gospel, where Jesus says there is no marriage in heaven. Instead of giving some kind of explanation, they chose to give no answer. Strike one. Second problem was an elder that bragged on how his wife gave birth by c-section….8 times. Any man that makes his wife go through eight surgeries for offspring, is evil. All there is to it. Third problem was that I was told I could wear what I wanted to church, while at the same time observing that women were allowed to only wear dresses. And it went downhill from there.

I believe the Mormon church gets to believe what it wants. But I don’t believe they get to create and enforce entire classes of citizens remanded to inferiority based upon nature alone, rather than action of those individuals. That is called damnation according to form. Would be like believing all spiders everywhere should die, rather than just the ones I find in my bathroom.

Blacks can now be members, and blacks can enter priesthood. But that was only the case after enough pressure from society at large. Women are still inherently inferior in the church, or inherently special, depending how you look at it. I mostly found them cowed. Little power and little presence in the decision making process. Good or bad? Hard to say, but certainly doesn’t lead to fair pay for women or non discrimination in the workplace. Speaking of which, even the workplace is cowed into having to close its doors on Sunday.

So yes, you have a right to believe that gay humans are inferior to the extent that they deserve no legal bonds of marriage. Do you have the right to tell a business it must shut its doors on Sunday, do you have a right to tell individuals what to drink, smoke, or wear? I believe all men with blond hair should walk on their hands. Does that give me the right, when and if I have the power – to force blond men to walk on their hands?

Is that a correct belief? Are women inferior? Is that a correct belief? You also might believe the sky is orange, or that global warming is not real as the rising oceans cover your own feet. Is that a correct belief? And beyond correctness, when does “belief” stretch out its effects when combined with power and money?


So we are stuck on this word belief. “I get to believe what I want to believe.” But when that belief flows into discrimination and exclusion, we are going to have a problem. Especially when the request is for bare bones inclusion, based on fundamental humanitarian rights.

It’s about power and money. Belief without power is nothing. The church leaders know it’s about power and money, those are their two favorite tools. my thoughts here are disregarded immediately, for they come from a woman? Yet a woman performed the rights of blessing for me once, and they worked. Are you that afraid your God has no understanding of that which He created? She created?

So here’s the thing. No one expects you to change your “belief.” But everybody knows that with great power comes great responsibility. My question then is, why has the LDS church worked to get itself into a position of power, where I even give two farts what they think or believe?

It’s because, on one hand they ARE humanitarian and desire fair access to decision-processes by every male. At least male-to-male they strive for a fair degree of equality. That kind of goes under better than nothing. Though within that structure, there are definite rungs to their ladder. And there is a definite striving to hold onto positions of power once achieved.

So what I am saying – and I’m saying this to ALL churches, to ALL religious bodies. What you “believe-in” more than anything, is Power. The only thing that changes doctrine, is what threatens that Power. Therefore these are institutions of Man, not God. And you have no right to Godly blessings when striving for only Earthly power. You have no continuance for Godly audience, when are focused upon disdain for Godly creation.

Is not that I do not understand the unwillingness to take steps toward equality of human to human. Exclusion is the basis for precepts of Heaven and Hell, afterall. But we as a society, are having a little bit of difficulty in funneling human beings off into ‘heaven’ (wealth) and ‘hell’ (jail) — if you have not noticed that.

We are having a little bit of difficulty in maintaining ‘exclusion’ as a basis for Power. It is not feasible in the long run, and must have changes if we are to continue as a viable and progressive civilization. To some, it is comforting to know that they will never qualify for positions of power. It’s an excuse for doing nothing.

But we are talking about the belief, the structure within a church that bolsters and maintains its power – to have those beliefs change to include a right of marriage for all individuals, not just man to woman. Or in the case of the LDS church, not just Man taking ownership of Woman. Marriage is ownership when there is an exclusion of one member within the decision-making process.

All there is to it, and allowing anyone to marry anyone dissolves the dichotomy of that structure. But what if you believe marriage is an equality – is a partnership of equality rather than an ownership of another?

See, this is the rub. You can’t condone gay marriage, because you believe marriage itself is not a joining of equal forces. So why am I happy, why do I see the strives of our government to make marriage-equality a real thing as advantageous to my own positioning? Because it means a dissolution of the precept condoning women as chattel, it means a redefinition of marriage as a bond that goes beyond the bonds of a man owning a woman.

Marriage will go from cementing unfair advantages, to encouraging fair partnerships. And if you can’t see that as a ‘good’ thing within the limitations of what you term “belief,” then I am sorry for your inability to make the correct connections for moving forward in thought and deed –while we as a nation, enter new ages and new understandings for progress and survival. Come with us or not, all we have to do is guarantee there are more of “us” (U.S.A.) than there are of you. And that isn’t hard, no matter how many wives you force into having 8 c-sections.

So I suggest you get with the program. Find it in your hearts to understand that the ‘church’ needs its renaissance, it needs to grow not just in members, but in scopes of understanding for the further benefit of humankind. And if it does not do that, it fails its purpose. The very first purpose. Which is to introduce kindness into power.

To teach kindness. To hold dear that which promotes kindness. And kindness is the opposite of exclusion. Kindness means we shed our proclivity to make ourselves grand by pushing down others. Kindness means, “Let the children come unto me.” No matter if those children are poor or rich. Gay or straight. Woman or Man. Girl or Boy.


One Reply to “To love, Honor, and not Obey”

Feedback always welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s