Why should LDS members care?

  • “If you have done it unto the least of these, you have done it unto me”
    • On the outside, Henry Stuart Matis was an average, faithful, LDS priesthood holder. But on the inside, he struggled with a secret that filled him with pain, confusion, and self-hatred. His final stand against this secret, nearly solitary battle took place in the midst of the LDS Church’s Proposition 22 campaign. Stuart ended his battle when he took his own life on the steps of his meetinghouse in Los Altos, California.
  • It will touch all of us….sooner or later. If not in our own families, in our ward and stake families there are people grappling with this issue. Some have been cast out from homes – from parents, from siblings, from the very people who are supposed to love them the most, to deal with these issues on their own. We can be shepherds to these Children of God by showing an outpouring of love.
  • We are making our own personal legacies today. Video footage of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream Speech”, includes many who are not Black. Had we been there, would we have had the courage to attend and show our support for such a just cause? The Church had not yet reached out to our Black brothers and sisters fully at the time of that speech, yet many Mormons shared King’s dream. The church has not yet reached out to our Gay brothers and sisters. We want to have the courage to stand with them in their pursuit of equality today.
  • Is the church poking itself in the eye? Will this just become yet another thing that they have to apologize for and backtrack on later? Wilford Woodruff said that he would live as if the millennium were coming tomorrow, but he would still plant cherry trees (which take a long time to grow). We need to be planning for the long haul.
  • Do we really want the government to be able to define what is and what isn’t a morally justifiable lifestyle? The primary responsibility of government is to defend and protect our inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the primary role of the Constitution is to limit what the government can or cannot do. Constitutions are not places to delineate what citizens can or cannot do. If two consenting adults wish to marry, do we really want to grant the government the power to prohibit them from doing so? Moral issues such as this are best discussed on a personal level, and not legislated by the government; if the government gets into the business of defining morality, what becomes of individual agency and responsibility. And who, exactly, will define what is moral and what is not?