By Dave Zirin

x-posted from Edge of Sports with permission.

As supporters of Gay Marriage have discovered, it’s never easy to be on the Mormon Church’s enemies list. The Church of Latter-Day Saints backed the anti-Gay Marriage Proposition 8 in California with out-of-state funds, and gave the right a heartbreaking victory this past election cycle. But the Mormon Church has been challenged in the past. Just ask Bob Beamon.

If you know Beamon’s name it’s almost certainly because he won the long jump gold medal in legendary fashion at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics. Beamon leapt 29 feet, 2.5 inches, a record that held for twenty-three years. Great Britain’s Lynn Davies told Beamon afterwards, “You have destroyed this event.” This is because Beamon was not only the first long jumper to break 29 feet, he was the first to break 28.

But you may not know that Beamon almost never made it to Mexico City. Along with eight other teammates, Beamon had his track and field scholarship revoked from the University of Texas at El Paso, the previous year. They had refused to compete against Brigham Young University. Beamon and his teammates were protesting the racist practices of the Mormon Church, and their coach at UTEP, Wayne Vanderburge, made them pay the ultimate price.

They weren’t alone. As tennis great Arthur Ashe wrote in his book, Hard Road to Glory, “In October 1969, fourteen black [football] players at the University of Wyoming publicly criticized the Mormon Church and appealed to their coach, Lloyd Eaton, to support their right not to play against Brigham Young University. . . . The Mormon religion at the time taught that blacks could not attain to the priesthood, and that they were tainted by the curse of Ham, a biblical figure. Eaton, however, summarily dropped all fourteen players from the squad.”

The players, though, didn’t take their expulsion lying down. They called themselves the Black 14 and sued for damages with the support of the NAACP. In an October 25th game against San Jose State, the entire San Jose team wore black armbands to support the 14.

One aftershock of this episode was in November 1969, when Stanford University President Kenneth Pitzer suspended athletic relations with BYU, announcing that Stanford would honor what he called an athlete’s “Right of Conscience.” The “Right of Conscience” allowed athletes to boycott an event which he or she deemed “personally repugnant.” As the Associated Press wrote, “Waves of black protest roll toward BYU, assaulting Mormon belief and leaving BYU officials and students, perplexed, hurt, and maybe a little angry.”

On June 6th, 1978, as teams were refusing road trips to Utah with greater frequency, and the IRS started to make noises about revoking the church’s holy tax-free status, a new revelation came …

Whether a cynical ploy to avoid the taxman or a coincidence touched by God, the results were the same: Black people were now human in the eyes of the Church. African Americans were no longer, as Brigham Young himself once put it, “uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable, and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.” The IRS was assuaged, the athletic contests continued, and the church entered a period of remarkable growth.

Similar pressure must be brought to bear on the Mormon Church today for its financing of Proposition 8 in California. One nonprofit crunched the numbers and found that $17.67 million of the $22 million used to pass the anti-gay marriage legislation was funneled through 59,000 Mormon families since August. It was done with the institutional backing of the church, though many pro-gay Mormons have spoken out defiantly against the church’s political intervention.

The question now is whether this latest tale of social conflict and the Church of Latter-Day Saints will also spill onto the athletic field. Men’s athletics have been one of the last proud hamlets of homophobia in our society (although the attitudes of male athletes is more progressive than you might think). But women’s sports has been historically more open around issues of sexuality.

Will any women collegians raise the specter of Proposition 8 if they have to travel to the schools of Utah? Will we see the ghosts of Black 14 emerge from the past? If any athletes choose to act, the ramifications could be “Beamonesque.”

Chino Blanco

x-posted from Stop The Mormons

Admittedly, I got busy with the holidays and fell behind in my reading at some of my favorite websites.  I figured I could bookmark, spend a couple days getting reacquainted with the wife and kids, and then catch up later.  

Later was apparently too late:

No longer available?  Now that’s disappointing.

What happened?  

After the success of the Evangelical-Mormon lovefest otherwise known as Prop 8, I was really looking forward to reading what Glenn Beck might write over at James Dobson’s place.  Would Glenn use the opportunity to ask Dr. Dobson about that time back in 2004 when Dobson’s wife, Shirley, excluded Mormons from the National Day of Prayer?  And would Glenn suggest that maybe, in the afterglow of Prop 8, now was a good time for Dr. Dobson to offer an apology to Mormons for not letting them use the word “Christian” to describe themselves?  And would it be an apology as heartfelt as the one that Beck delivered to Dobson on-air in 2007?  And, considering how successful the Mormons were at helping the Evangelicals keep the word “marriage” all to themselves out in California, would Dr. Dobson perhaps finally be moved to graciously begin sharing the “C” word with the Mormons?  I mean, Beck and Dobson are both good “Christians” right?  

The potential was there for an absolutely riveting read.

So, what happened?

Well, it turns out that apparently Dr. Dobson has agreed that the “C” word does apply to Mormons.  The problem now is that it’s that other “C” word.  See if you can spot it while I try to sort out the story behind this gripping tale of a dead link.

December 19:  A story goes up on Focus on the Family’s CitizenLink website promoting Mormon TV host Glenn Beck’s latest book, “The Christmas Sweater.”

Later that same day, a Christian blogger pens a brief diary under the title Focus on the Family Embraces Mormonism.

December 21: Another Christian blogger weighs in, this time in a post titled Focus on the Family Implicitly Affirms Mormonism that includes this advice:

I strongly discourage you from giving money to any religious organization that is so committed to a social agenda that they are willing to ignore the vast difference between biblical Christianity and the cult of Mormonism … When Christians yoke up with unbelievers in order to promote a common social agenda, we display a gross lack of discernment, feed religious pluralism, and end up doing all kinds of wierd [sic] and sinful things in hopes of restoring the Andy Griffith moralism of the 1950s …

December 22: A press release goes out over the ChristianNewsWire announcing that Focus on the Family Promotes Mormon Glenn Beck at CitizenLink and that:

Clearly, Mormonism is a cult. The CitizenLink story does not mention Beck’s Mormon faith, however, the story makes it look as if Beck is a Christian who believes in the essential doctrines of the faith … to promote a Mormon as a Christian is not helpful to the cause of Jesus Christ. For Christians to influence society, Christians should be promoting the central issues of the faith properly without opening the door to false religions.

Later that same day, John Schroeder, the Christian half of the Evangelical-Mormon blogging duo over at Article VI responds with Embarrassed By My Brethren … and writes:

This move [promoting Glenn Beck] by the Dobson organization should be applauded loudly and long.  Nobody can swing more evangelical votes than James Dobson – NOBODY. … Of course, if we are lucky, this blog will be the only outlet in the world to pay attention to this press release [slamming Dobson’s promotion of Beck on the CitizenLink site].

December 24: No such luck.  And our unlucky Article VI blogger, noticing that the Glenn Beck article has been pulled off the CitizenLink website, posts this woeful update:  ARRGH!:

… the Dobson organization has caved …

The absolute worst part is that in California we have just witnessed what is possible if Mormons and Evangelicals and Catholics unite politically – so how does the leading Evangelical public figure (although Dobson is rapidly being supplanted in that role by Pastor Warren) respond?  By caving to the slighest pressure from a few grossly over-zealous types.  Which does what?  It weakens an already very weak and formative bridge between.

Shame on the Dobson organization.

Wow.

And now I’m wondering why they even need two bloggers over at Article VI?  John Schroeder’s obviously got serious talent when it comes to generating a passionate debate with himself:

Nobody can swing more evangelical votes than James Dobson!  Dobson is yesterday’s news, all hail Rick Warren!  The Dobson organization should be applauded loudly and long!  Shame on the Dobson organization!

Ouch.

And now that Dobson has scrubbed his site of Beck’s Mormon taint, it’ll be interesting to watch and see if Lowell Brown (the Mormon half of Article VI) has anything more to say on the subject.  What say you, Lowell?  For all your hard work on Prop 8, what gift were Mormons like yourself hoping to receive from Evangelicals who consider yours a false religion and your church a cult?  

Whatever it was, you need to wake up and go check your Christmas stocking:  Santa Dobson has done delivered your lump of coal.  

Chino Blanco

Four questions.  

Four answers.

Q&A #1 (4:18 minutes):

A) Laughable?  What’s “laughable” is Gary’s “6,000 years” assertion re some global six-millennia-strong definition of marriage.

B) Consequences?  Gary:  maybe some of us are thinking about the consequences for first- and second-graders with LGBT parents, rather than simply ignoring them.

C) Frame it however you’d like, Gary, but if I allow my kids to attend the wedding of a teacher – who they adore – what business is that of yours?  Your framing of what you call “a mistake” strikes me as yet another example of folks like you making it your business to infringe on the rights of parents like me.

Roll tape #1:

Q&A #2 (3:12 minutes):

A) “Institutional” vs. “member” funds.  Not much to say about this exchange.  That said, it did leave me wondering how to square Gary’s line re individual Mormon member financing of Prop 8 with his later comments (see Q&A #4) re the vertical structure of the LDS church?  

Roll tape #2:

Q&A #3 (3:50 minutes):

A)  Yes, Gary, me and you both would like to see some post-Prop 8 “Name ID” polling on that.

B)  The mid-October 2008 tracking poll that Gary cites is very interesting. Seven percent ??? 7% ???  …

Thanks, Gary, for confirming that those of us on the No side didn’t get the job done when it came time for drawing attention to who – specifically – was funding Prop 8.

C) Gary’s planning to do some follow-up polling two years from now?  Blue’s Clues, folks.  2010.  Get ready.  Gary & Co. already are.

Roll tape #3:

Q&A #4 (3:35 minutes):

A) What is it – exactly – that makes Mormons different from other faiths?  Gary knows.  Listen and learn.  It’s got a lot to do with vertical vs. horizontal and geographic vs. non-geographic organizational structures.

B) Force? Mormons don’t use “force”?  Whatever.  

We’re a nation of laws, Gary.  In this country, our secular laws = all the force needed to turn your agenda into my reality.  And I’ll respect that “force” throughout my campaign to change the laws that you’ve helped to implement, because, whether you like it or not (and even if you recognize it or not) we’re all Americans.

So, finally, roll tape #4:

Granted, none of this makes much sense (in terms of a way forward) unless you’re willing to listen to the audio and walk in Gary’s Mormon Weltanschauung for just a few minutes.

For those who are willing to listen and learn, I know you’ll be emboldened … because once you’ve caught wind of Gary’s own polling, you’ll come to understand that our Mormon opponents are not nearly as daunting as you might have supposed.

All their admitted competence aside, what they’ve figured out is ultimately not all that complicated.  Our opponents are who they are.  They’re vertically integrated … and Gary’s February polling is what it is.  And as long as we remain true to the task at hand, we will move on and render Dr. Lawrence’s early 2008 findings inoperative.

Their best days are behind them.  Their only hope has always been those folks in the muddled middle who, until lately, were conveniently unaware that both Mike Huckabee and Rick Cizik were about to get their respective asses kicked by folks on both sides of this issue (by Jon Stewart and the NAE, respectively).  

Going forward, Gary will continue to read his tea leaves, but we’re gonna drink his Mormon milkshake.  

Because even if many of us can’t see it yet, there is a 50-state strategy emerging in the Prop 8 aftermath: because all of a sudden there’s an understanding that any successful strategy relies on all of us taking the fight to whoever dares get in our way locally.  Wherever we are, whatever the locale, we all understand:  coordination is no substitute for courage.

The Prop 8 campaign looks set to be remembered as the exception that finally got us fired up enough to prove the rule that we’re all Americans.

Enjoy your victory, Gary.

And good luck with your future polling efforts.

I look forward to hearing more from you in the future.

Chino Blanco

With apologies to Rick Jacobs:  my title’s adapted from his totally worthy Why we’re mad at the Mormon church.

I just finished reading this from the LDS “Newsroom” …

Which reminded me that I’d previously written Maurine Proctor (editor of an influential Mormon mag) back in August about some of the stuff that Meridian (her mag) was putting out there in support of Prop 8 … and that she’d replied with an article by Roger Severino, legal counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

The same Becket (of recent No Mob Veto fame) and Ballard (of Mormon Apostolic fame) who were BFF long before they recently started whining about our post-election actions.

Which led me to mutter to myself:  enough with the Kabuki, Ballard.

As if Stop The Mormons hadn’t long since put together the definitive timeline re your shenanigans.  

To whit:

Graphic and timeline courtesy of Stop The Mormons

March 1997: Leaked memo provides insight into the late LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley’s strategy for opposing same-sex marriage. It describes a meeting in which Hinckley gives the go ahead, but urged caution. According to the memo, “he (President Hinckley) also said the (LDS) Church should be in a coalition and not out front by itself.” Also names Dick Wirthlin, who is related to Massachusetts couple in Prop 8 ads, as strategist.

October 1998: Of the $600,000 used to try to ban gay marriage in Alaska, $500,000 came from one big lump sum donation from the Mormon Church. It seems that they learned that they should have their members give the money in the future to avoid criticism.

September 2007:  Mitt Romney, in an interview with Christianity Today, describes an earlier 2007 Salt Lake City meeting between Jerry Falwell and Gordon B. Hinckley to discuss their cooperation on a campaign against same-sex marriage in California.

February 2008:  Mormon-supported National Organization for Marriage (NOM) makes their first reported payment to Bader & Associates, the signature-gathering firm hired to help get Prop 8 on the ballot. Due to its sizeable early financial support of ProtectMarriage, NOM is chiefly responsible for the qualification of Proposition 8. Matthew Holland, son of LDS Apostle and former BYU president Jeffrey R. Holland, is on the board of directors. There are many Mormon donors to NOM that have not been identified because the focus has been on the ProtectMarriage committee.

May/June: The New York Times reports about this time in retrospect: “First approached by the Roman Catholic archbishop of San Francisco a few weeks after the California Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in May, the Mormons were the last major religious group to join the campaign, and the final spice in an unusual stew that included Catholics, evangelical Christians, conservative black and Latino pastors, and myriad smaller ethnic groups with strong religious ties.”

June 29: A highly unusual letter from Mormon leadership was read from the pulpits in California (although it was leaked and posted on websites several days prior). It stated in part: “We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman.” To most Mormons, a call such as this from their Prophet is the same as being called of God.

July 1: A letter later reports some of Mormon efforts during the coming month. “Congregations of LDS all having been taught the doctrine in July so that they may see the importance of fundraising and grassroots participation. Some Stakes have called all Stake Council and wives as well as several folks who may be able to contribute not on the Council. The Stake President, in that Cottage Meeting, has asked for their support. A great part of a fund raising effort, accomplished in one night.”

July 7: Mormon Gary Lawrence, the California “LDS Grassroots Director” for Prop 8 and father of a gay son, writes in the online LDS oriented Meridian Magazine and compares opponents of Proposition 8 to those who sided with Lucifer against Jesus in a pre-mortal battle that is part of Mormon doctrine. His son later resigns from the church.

July 27: Top Mormon leaders participate in a meeting with “eight Area Directors in Northern California. These are amazingly powerful people. The Area folks represent the grassroots effort for the passage of the Proposition and their responsibility overlays each Coordinating Council. This was a great and powerful meeting. I assure you that the LDS folks who work closely with or who are on the Board directly of the coalition are very impressive and politically experienced folks.” (ref)

July 28: Letter sent out to Mormon Stake (regional) Presidents to explain the structure they would be operating under along with other information that arose out of the previous day leadership meeting. “The Brethren have felt that the best way to organize and pass the Proposition is to have an Ecclesiastical arm and a Grassroots arm to organization.” (See the letter here)

July 30: Member of LDS church states on blog, “I simply can’t bear another Sunday of political announcements, talks, and constant references to the proposition in Relief Society lessons.”

July 31: A few Mormon church members around the Internet have been wondering how “worthy” they would be if they don’t fall into line.

August 1: “All Regional Directors have been called and contacted by Area Directors for training.” (ref)

August 3: “Training of Regional Directors commences by the Area Directors.” (ref)

August 6:  whatisprop8.com is registered and a site is launched by Mormon Kenny McNett where he teaches young Mormons how to spam blogs. He later is featured in videos produced by the Mormon church and the church is later accused of not reporting contributions such as these production and video distribution efforts.

August 7: Local Mormon leaders continue soliciting donations.  A Mormon blogger on nine-moons.com reports that the previous night he had a call from his Stake President, a high level regional Mormon leader over multiple local congregations. “We knew it was going to be about California’s Proposition 8 – that’s all the stake’s been talking about for the past month.” The leader asked “about making a contribution- a rather sizable contribution. He already had a figure in mind.” The blogger made the donation the next morning, and an hour later their realtor called to say that they got the dream house they had made an offer on. The blogger called this “an amazing testimony of obedience” in his post.

August 8: Sophia comments on nine-moons.com (see Aug 7): “My father in law is a bishop in Southern CA. For those of you who want to know how much a family is expected to give to Prop 8 in his stake, it’s $1000. A rich ward is expected to be able to come up with about $150,000 for Prop 8.”

August 8: Tim says on nine-moons: “I think the majority are in line with the prophets and apostles on this one. Those who hold temple recommends have acknowledged that they support the general and local authorities of the church. Like me, they will be walking neighborhoods asking others what they think and sharing information.”

August 9: An article written by Glen Greener, a Mormon with a controversial past (“citygate”) in Salt Lake City government, and posted to the Mormon oriented Meridian Magazine website, claimed nine consequences if proposition 8 fails. The questionable claims in the writing are soon edited and distributed by Mormons in the campaign.

August 10: “Zip Code Supervisors are in place and are to be trained by Regional Directors.” (ref)

August 16: If there is one thing that Mormons are known for, it’s knocking on doors. “The First of three Saturday precinct walks are to be held under the direction of the Regional Directors.” (ref) Jeff Flint, a strategist with Protect Marriage, spoke about this period after the campaign, estimating that Mormons made up 80 percent to 90 percent of the early volunteers who walked door-to-door in election precincts.

August 17: A somewhat mysterious and hard to decipher group called the Eagle Foundation joins the Prop 8 forces. It apparently is the evolution of the Eagle PAC which was formed to get Mormons financially involved in politics. One of the main players in Eagle, Bart Marcois, founded and chaired the RNC Advisory Council on LDS Outreach, and was responsible for massive volunteer surge team deployments nationwide in the 2004 and 2006 campaign cycles. He apparently used his talent for grass-root Mormon organizing for the Prop 8 campaign.  The Prop 8 campaign reportedly paid Eagle $130,000 in October.

August 19: The controversial authors name is stripped from “nine consequences” and an anonymous document, called “Six Consequences if Prop. 8 Fails” begins circulating the internet, mostly on Mormon-related blogs.  The document was filled with dishonest claims that are later rebutted for the few who would listen. Some blogs reference that it was provided by Mormon Gary Lawrence, the California “LDS Grassroots Director” for Prop 8 (see July 7). “Six Consequences” also starts to become widely available within Mormon congregations and as handouts during canvassing.

August 23: The second Saturday of walking and canvassing occurs in precincts.  The ‘six consequences’ are mentioned in the news reports that followed – the LDS canvassers were carrying copies of the questionable “Six Consequences” with them door-to-door.

August 27: MormonsFor8.com is registered by a private individual and launches as a clearinghouse for information about tracking the exploding Mormon contributions for Prop 8.

September 1: Sometime in September, Sonja Eddings Brown, a Mormon, is hired by ProtectMarriage and becomes the chief spokesperson for the campaign. According to a bio provided on her husbands website, “Sonja has served as a news media specialist for the Church in Southern California, but is now on leave from that assignment.” On a side note, a student who came to know her some time ago found her to be rather unpleasant.

September 4: Fundraising calls by top church officials to high profile Mormons were already underway, according to the former president of Clorox in a Wall Street Journal story. He was invited to participate in a conference call of 40 to 60 potential donors, led by a high church official, known as a member of the Quorum of Seventy, where he was asked to make a $25,000 donation. The donation was recorded on September 4. The call likely occurred between this date and August 21, when his unsolicited donation of $3,000 was recorded.

September 7: Continued reports of much Prop 8 activity in Mormon churches. A blog reports that members were getting up to speak about it in testimony meeting, which is the type of church service held the first Sunday of the month.  Someone comments on the blog, “It is mentioned in every meeting, donation sheets are passed around in RS and there are pleas for donations and volunteers in the announcements as well as impromptu testimonies during classes. It is EVERYWHERE!!!!”

September 11: Mormon leadership issues letter to be read in all congregations in the U.S. stating the church “affirms its constitutional right of expression on political and social issues.”

September 11: Mormon Bishop, at the direction of higher authorities, visits home of a church member who set up a website opposing the church position on Prop 8, and asks for resignation before threatening excommunication.

September 15: MormonsFor8.com reports: “As of  5:00 PM PST, Sept 15, 35% of all donors to protectmarriage.com are identified as Mormons, and their total contributions make up 29% of the total money donated. The percentages are growing everyday. Please help out by checking the list to see if you can identify any other Mormon donors.”

September 20: The Wall Street Journal reports in an article: “The Mormon Church encouraged its members to send their donations to a separate post-office box set up by a church member, said Messrs. Schubert and L. Whitney Clayton, a senior Mormon Church official involved in the campaign. Mr. Clayton said the church didn’t keep track of how much individual Mormons donated, just the cumulative total. He said members bundled the donations and forwarded them to the campaign.”

September 20: Wall Street Journal also reported, “The tally of Mormon contributions was provided by Frank Schubert, campaign manager for ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, the initiative’s primary backer. A finance-tracking group corroborated Mormon fund-raising dominance, saying it could exceed 40%.”

September 22: Plans for “One million signs will be put up in yards around the state at 7:00am” (ref) did not come through. Apparently the Yes on 8 folks didn’t buy American. An email from Gina Downey, the producer of a cult hit Mormon film GODS ARMY said: “The YES on Prop 8 yard signs have been delayed in route from China.”

September 23:  LDS Church Prop 8 campaign strategy “update” memo surfaces at WikiLeaks.

September 28: MormonsFor8.com reports that Mormon donations make up the largest group of donors to Prop 8 at 40.4% of contributions.

September 29: ProtectMarriage runs first television ad with Mormon professor from Pepperdine University making false claims that teaching gay marriage in schools was a certainty, causing problems for the school in the process. The campaign later continues using the Pepperdine name despite objections from the school.

September 30: According to data filed with the secretary of state’s office, ProtectMarriage.com, the main group backing Prop 8, had raised about $25.4 million. No on 8, Equality for All – the main group opposing the measure – had raised almost $15.8 million. Yes on 8 was flush with a cash balance of about $12.8 million, due by large measure to Mormon contributions, while No on 8 had approximately $1.8 million.

October 1: Mormon church registers the domain preservingmarriage.org and launches a site with material to support the campaign. Questions are later raised questioning if the church reported non-monetary contributions such as this to the State of California, leading to an official investigation.

October 6: Mormon blogs about “zealousness” about Prop 8 within Mormon congregations and says “many bishops and other Mormons have circulated the document ‘Six Consequences if Proposition 8 fails'” and expresses distress about the honesty of the claims.

October 7: “Ryan” who lives in Utah posts comment to blog and states he was in a propaganda video shot by the Mormon church with LDS leader Elder Bednar. He also says, “I live in Utah (though I’m from California) and the church has asked my stake to have 250 member ready to man a call center on the subject.”

October 8: Top Mormon leaders made a televised satellite broadcast appeal to church members (view the transcript) to step up their already considerable efforts. They asked for 30 members from each California congregation to donate four hours per week to the campaign. They also called on young married couples and single Mormons to use the Internet, text messaging, blogging and other forms of computer technology to help pass the initiative, saying the church has created a new Web site with materials they can download and post on their own social networking sites.

October 8: The Associated Press reported that “Mormons Recruit Out-of-State for Gay Marriage Ban. Mormons living outside California have been asked to volunteer for a telephone campaign to help pass a ballot initiative banning same-sex marriage in the state.”

October 8: No on 8 makes plea for $10 million in donations saying “our lead is gone” in an attempt to recover ground due in no small part to massive giving by Mormons.

October 12: Mormons distributing Yes on 8 signs from at least one church parking lot to cars leaving Sunday church services.

October 12: Mormon Jyl Holiday makes comment on blog that in her congregation “they have us knocking doors to warn people about it. Calling like telemarketers, and EVERY talk is about Prop 8, every RS, priesthood class is based around the proposition, it is starting to deterr members from even going to church. I TOTALLY see why the general presidency is asking for us to fight here in CA, but some of the members feel that it is just too much of shoving down the throught for them to handle.”

October 13: Sacramento Bee reports “[Mormon] Church members have donated about 40 percent of the $22.8 million raised to pass the initiative since July, according to Frank Schubert, campaign manager for ProtectMarriage.com, the primary backer of the “yes” campaign.” Some have said that this article, and the Mormon couple interviewed, was a “wake up call” to the No on 8 campaign about the depth of individual Mormon participation.

October 13: Idaho television reports about organizing by the Mormon church in their area to operate phone banks to reach California voters.

October 14: ProtectMarriage.com had raised just over $26 million, according to new data filed with the secretary of state’s office.

October 17: ProtectMarriage started running new ads starring a Mormon power couple, the Wirthlins, with a famous name and high ranking relatives in the Mormon church (which is not discovered by the public until later, including that one was a church strategist in their battle against same sex marriage). Their story, one of the most powerful scare tactics used in the Prop 8 campaign, is later reported on with their credibility called into question by some neighbors who suspect they went looking for this battle.

October 21: Lowell Brown, husband of the “yes” side’s public spokesperson Sonja Eddings Brown, and himself an “Area Director” for the campaign, says on his blog that MormonsFor8.com numbers for Mormon contributions are LOW. “I see lots of individuals on the list whom I know to be members of the Church, but who haven’t been identified yet.”

October 22: Around this time, ProtectMarriage sends blacklist threat letters to No on 8 supporters, which is defended by Mormon Sonja Eddings Brown, spokesperson for Protect Marriage, and is later talked about on Dr. Phil.

October 22: A Mormon blogger reports, “the Church has added even more resources to its new PreservingMarriage.org website, which has a sleek resign that’s a little less conspicuously LDS, though still with the Church logo emblazoned at the bottom.”

October 24: Sonja Eddings Brown on Bill O’Reilly. Says, “Since the dawn of time and through many current studies, we know that children do best when they come from a low-conflict home with a mother and a father.” Such claims, uttered over and over during the campaign, outrage many authors of the studies because they do not apply to families with same sex parents.

October 24: Salt Lake Tribune: “LDS leaders have tapped every resource, including the church’s built-in phone trees, e-mail lists and members’ willingness to volunteer and donate money. Many California members consider it a directive from God and have pressured others to participate. Some leaders and members see it as a test of faith and loyalty. Those who disagree with the campaign say they feel unwelcome in wards that have divided along political lines. Some are avoiding services until after the election; others have reluctantly resigned. Even some who favor the ballot measure are troubled by their church’s zeal in the matter.”

October 24: Salt Lake Tribune states “literature written by Proposition 8 proponents is freely distributed in Mormon wards, giving the impression the church approves it, but much of it is “misinformation,” said Morris Thurston, an LDS attorney in Orange County. Thurston has circulated a point-by-point refutation to an anonymously authored document that has been widely disseminated by Mormons, “Six Consequences . . . If Proposition 8 Fails.” Thurston argues that most of its arguments are either untrue or misleading.”

October 24: A blogger states, “There seems to be a disconnect between that straightforward counsel being given by senior LDS leaders and the reality of what is happening on the ground in California.”

October 25: Media reporting that due to criticism, the LDS church pulls the plug on out of state phone banks.

October 28: Prop 8 announces $1 million matching donation by Mormon Alan Ashton, grandson of David O. McKay, President of the Mormon Church from 1951-1970.

November 2:  Mormons end services with “keys of the priesthood” prayer for the passage of Prop 8, an extremely unusual act that causes some controversy in congregations.

FINAL TALLY: Mormons are believed to have contributed anywhere from 40% to 77% of the money for Prop 8.

Chino Blanco

Gary Lawrence, director of Proposition 8’s Mormon grassroots effort.

The Brethren [the top echelon of Mormon leadership] have felt that the best way to organize and pass the Proposition is to have an Ecclesiastical arm and a Grassroots arm to the organization … The senior folks who run the grassroots are LDS at the coalition and are headed by Glen Greener and Gary Lawrence.

Here’s Gary, back in August, firing up his Mormon brigades …

Why Mormons Are In This Fight:

If same-sex marriage advocates [win], the whole structure collapses – the family, the nation, and in time civilization itself. The time has come for those of us who believe that God, not man, created marriage … to take a stand and defend it.

(Gary’s astounding post-victory TV interview after the break)

But before we roll tape, here’s Gary again from the summer, this time calling on Mormons from across the land to join the battle …

How Mormons Are Going To Win:

While we … are mobilizing thousands to walk precincts, you can help us from the comfort of your homes … if you live in the Eastern or Central time zones, you can use free late-evening minutes on weekdays to call when Californians have just finished dinner.

Mission accomplished.

And how is Gary celebrating his victory?

By promoting his latest book, of course:

How Americans View Mormonism (Seven Steps To Improve Our Image)

Here’s the author taking his turn on KSL5 TV:  

My favorite piece of advice from Dr. Lawrence to his fellow Mormons:

“Just be yourself.”

Perhaps the good doctor might consider that “being yourself” is a poor prescription for winning friends when “who you are” is someone willing to lead a campaign to strip your own child of his civil rights.

Meet Matthew Lawrence:

“Matthew is gay and is the son of Gary Lawrence, 67, who is the “State LDS Grassroots Director” for the state of California.”

This kind of heartless crap really upsets me, and I think maybe I need to speak directly to Gary at this point.

What this says about you as a father, Gary, is why it’s not surprising that you appear completely oblivious to the absolute incongruity of you, of all people, now touting your advice on the subject of improving Mormonism’s image.

How about taking a moment to reflect on your own comments in that KSL interview?

“Thirty-seven percent of all Americans do not know a Mormon, and 55 percent of all Americans do not know an active Mormon. In fact, those who know one Mormon have a worse opinion of us than those who don’t know any Mormons.“

Gary, if you were the only Mormon I knew, and if I thought for a second that all Mormons were just like you, you can bet I’d have a pretty low opinion of Mormonism.    

Considering how your own research indicates that the more people get to know you, the less they like you, how can your writing another book about Mormons (not to mention your going on the teevee to promote it) be viewed as anything other than a counterintuitive and boneheaded move?  Your own findings would seem to suggest that perhaps the first step to improving the Mormon image would be for Mormon PR flacks like yourself to simply go away.

Here’s my advice, Gary:  When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

Why not climb out of that hole, use some of the $212,463 that the Prop 8 campaign has so far paid you and Lawrence Research, and take the entire family on a nice vacation somewhere?  

Your loved ones might appreciate that, and it would free up the airwaves for all those decent Mormons out there who we need to be hearing from … and who are the only hope Mormonism’s got for repairing the damage you’ve done.

This is all your doing, Gary.  

Jan Shipps: A “Perfect Storm” of Bad PR for Mormon Church

Aravosis v. Utah

Own it.

Chino Blanco

Because nice people understand that nice means keeping close to home until all this recent unpleasantness blows over.

That said, Sonja, do you honestly believe that you’re the only member of the LDS church who’s been involved professionally with the Yes on 8 campaign?  What about this guy?  Or this guy?

Whatever.

I’m gonna let Jon take it from here:

Today’s Pop Quiz:  Sonja and Marvin both just happen to be members of which church?

Chino Blanco

“We believe ALL families matter and we do not believe in discrimination,

therefore, our family will vote against Prop 8.” — Barbara Young

Loved the gravestones, Barb.

RIP inequality, Nov. 4

RIP

May discrimination

be a thing of the past,

May hate and fear

be gone at last

RIP prop 8!

Those who forget

the past

are condemned

to repeat it.

No to 8!!!

And omens don’t get much clearer than Steve’s #8 getting retired last month, do they?

Thank you for doing the right thing and standing up for all families.

And this one’s special because a few years from now my daughter is gonna look a lot like Lily:

And Steve, thank you for the reminder that Family Comes First.

Always.

AP: Former 49er Steve Young voting No on Prop. 8

SF Chronicle: Steve Young lines up against Mormon church on Prop. 8

CBS5: Steve Young’s Home Displays ‘No On 8’ Signs

RIP prop 8!

Chino Blanco

(This is a really interesting internal Mormon point of view about the experience of the Mormon hierarchy’s push for Prop 8. Overt and direct use of religious communities for secular political ends damages not only the reputation of the politicized religion, but also tears at the fabric of the community of faithful – promoted by jsw)

By California Mormon

Reposted at Calitics with Permission

I am a lifelong Mormon, a native Californian, and a descendant of Mormon pioneers. Like many other Mormons, I am anguished by my Church’s endorsement of Proposition 8, a ballot initiative which would eliminate civil rights to marry now accorded to gay and lesbian people in California.

I am anguished for what this campaign would do in abolishing rights and protections now belonging to fellow California citizens. But I am also anguished by the consequences of this campaign for Mormon families and wards throughout California. Since June, I have felt the profound effects of the “Yes on 8” campaign in our church meetings. In my own ward, it has dominated the content of our Sacrament Meetings and auxiliary meetings, as well as our hallway conversations. What does it mean that we are being asked to give and are giving ourselves so zealously to this campaign?

I have wondered how the “Yes on 8” campaign connects with the core principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ-love the Lord with all thy heart, love thy neighbor as thyself. I have wondered how it relates to the first principles and ordinances of the gospel: faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, and laying on the hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost? Does it contribute to any of the three missions of the Church: to proclaim the gospel, to perfect the saints, or to redeem the dead? I understand that according to Mormon doctrine temple marriage is an ordinance necessary to exaltation. Still, I do not understand how the elimination of civil marriage rights for gays and lesbians in the state of California will do anything to bring more souls to Christ.

Instead, I have seen many negative consequences to Mormon spirituality from the “Yes on 8” campaign. The “Yes on 8” campaign has fueled a spirit of fear and misinformation in our California wards and beyond. For example, many bishops and other Mormons have circulated the document “Six Consequences if Proposition 8 Fails,” which alleges that Mormon churches will be sued or legally penalized for opposing or refusing to perform gay marriages and that schools will be compelled to teach same-sex marriage to young children. Mormon legal experts affiliated with Brigham Young University have studied these claims and found them “misleading and untrue” (http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=35). If the “glory of god is intelligence” (D&C 93:36), misinformation and rumor-mongering must chase the Spirit from our churches.

I have also witnessed how the “Yes on 8” campaign has unleashed and authorized broader expressions of anti-gay sentiment by Mormons, sentiments not in keeping with church teachings. The Church has come a long way in its treatment of homosexuality from the time our prophet Spencer W. Kimball described it as a base perversion in The Miracle of Forgiveness. But most members have not absorbed recent Church teachings that recognize same-sex attraction as an authentic form of sexual inclination that requires compassionate consideration and strict personal management. Just as many of us continue to hold unexamined, undoctrinal, prejudicial, archaic beliefs about African-Americans and the priesthood (false notions about the lineage of Cain, or “fencesitters” in the war in heaven which have no basis in gospel doctrine), we also continue to hold unexamined, damaging, prejudicial, archaic beliefs about homosexuality. From what I have seen, this campaign has become an opportunity for Mormons to feel triumphal in our antipathy towards gays and lesbians. In my own ward, my bishop started using the ward e-mail list to send several daily messages pertaining not to Proposition 8 but encouraging members to get involved in other campaigns in our area to oppose gay civil rights. Is it really the intention of the Church to systematically oppose the civil rights of gays and lesbians? Since the beginning of the “Yes on 8” campaign, I wonder how many of us have spoken uncarefully and uncompassionately about gay people, without knowing regard to recent Church teachings on homosexuality which ask us to have compassion for those inclined to same-sex attraction?

It is my observation that the zealousness of the “Yes on 8” campaign has unleashed a spirit of pride and political opportunism in our congregations. The “Yes on 8” campaign asks us to eliminate the current legal rights of thousands of actual families in California. Even though we have described the initiative as a “protection” for heterosexual marriage, the actual language and impact of the law (considered strictly and soberly) have nothing to do with strengthening heterosexual families. Instead, Proposition 8 eliminates the legal protections of marriage for same-sex couple families. Through our Mormon doctrinal lenses, we may not see gay families as families that will survive into the eternities. But to gay spouses, children, and other relatives, gay families are vital families. If we are to act with honesty and integrity, we must take sober responsibility for the fact that “Yes on 8” eliminates the rights of actually existing families. The “Yes on 8” campaign, strictly and honestly considered, is a mission of destruction. We must consider carefully what it means to undertake a mission of destruction in the name of God. In the Old Testament, Jonah asked God to destroy the city of Nineveh, and God gently rebuffed him, reminding him that even Nineveh was beloved (Jonah 4:11). The scriptures caution repeatedly that when we engage on spiritual errands, and especially those that bring judgment against our neighbors, we are at great risk of indulging our own self-righteousness and spiritual pride. We must do so with a great spirit of repentance, caution, and humility. And yet nothing in the spirit of the “Yes on 8” campaign as I have witnessed it obliges us to undertake this kind of repentant self searching. I have seen instead a sense of accomplishment, triumphalism, and pride in the reach of our financial and worldly power. I have not seen the humility and godly sorrow God expected of Jonah. Our God is also the God of gay and lesbian people; they are as beloved of him as we are. Their needs and sorrows are as real and meaningful to God as our obedience to the directions of our prophet.

I believe the “Yes on 8” campaign has distracted us from addressing our own internal matters of morality. The Savior plainly tells us to seek the “beam” in our own eye before we seek out the “mote” in our brother’s (Matthew 7:3). Does the zealousness with which we undertake the “Yes on 8” campaign lead our attention away from our own spiritual lives and attending to our own failings? We all know that there are serious problems of morality within Mormon communities too, including sexual abuse of children in Mormon settings and knowing negligence by Church leaders that has caused the Church to payout millions and millions of tithing dollars in legal settlements. Even with increased direction from our leaders, patterns of sexual abuse continue in Mormon communities (http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10548248). Have we cleared the “beams” from our own eyes?

I know that the “Yes on 8” campaign has created deep divisions within Mormon families. As Mormons, we are obligated to search ourselves, to ask if our relationships with our family members are loving and appropriate. Do we reject or deny our family members because they are gay? Is the zealousness of the “Yes on 8” campaign an outlet for our own feelings of shame, revulsion, disappointment, and failure in having gay children or family members? Some of the leading Mormon figures with the California Mormon “Yes on 8” campaign have gay children. Does God want us to sacrifice our relationships with gay children and relatives in order to serve Him? God led Abraham to Mount Horeb to teach him that child-sacrifice, a common practice among pagan peoples, was no longer warranted. It was no longer acceptable to Him. Henceforth, only God would sacrifice His son, Jesus Christ, to atone for the sins of the world. Now, after that great and atoning sacrifice, the only sacrifice we are asked to commanded to offer is that of a “broken heart and a contrite spirit” (3 Nephi 9:20). Do we sacrifice our gay children to impress God?

I know that the zealousness of the “Yes on 8” campaign has created an intolerable atmosphere in many wards and stakes for thousands of gay Mormons, their relatives, and friends. What is our obligation to care for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters? Has the zealousness of the Yes on 8 campaign brought a spirit into our wards and families which makes it impossible for our gay brothers and sisters to find a loving refuge in their own church? I believe it has.

The “Yes on 8” campaign has directed more than $10 million dollars (so far) from Mormon donors to a narrow political campaign. Much of this money was raised after the Church reviewed its tithing records and identified wealthy Mormons to recruit even larger donations from, using special conference calls with Church elders. Why are tithing records being utilized this way? What does this reveal about the way the wealth of individual members has played a growing role in church leadership decisions? How many lives could this money save through the Church’s Humanitarian General Fund? How many educations could this money pay for through the Church’s Perpetual Education Fund? Why does our concept of morality focus so zealously on gender and sexuality at the cost of efforts to end death by disease or starvation, proclaim peace, relieve the debtor, or show stewardship for God’s creation?

Finally, the “Yes on 8” campaign allies us with openly anti-Mormon churches, while alienating us further from other people of faith. As the Wall Street Journal reported, “Jim Garlow, pastor of the evangelical Protestant Skyline Church near San Diego and a leading supporter of Proposition 8, said, ‘I would not, in all candor, have been meeting them or talking with them had it not been for’ the marriage campaign.” Why are we attracted to the same divisive political battles that have been the hallmark of the Christian Right, when the churches of the Christian Right have long expressed their disdain and enmity for our beliefs?

Mormons are a religious minority trying to maintain our faith in a rapidly changing secular world. Our pioneer ancestors were killed and chased by mobs from the United States in part because their plural marriages were deemed unacceptable by the society they lived in. Why do we now turn with such zealousness to eliminate the marriage rights of other minorities?

I present these thoughts only because I believe that a record must be made of how our actions as a Mormon community are affecting not only the lives of gays and lesbians but also the spiritual lives of our wards and families here in California.

Micah 6:8: “What does the Lord require of you? To act justly, and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.”

Chino Blanco