Monday, May 29, 2006

Threat to Temple Marriage

In my post about the LDS First Presidency's letter, there was a comment from someone identified as "Concerned Mormon" that I felt needed further commenting.

As a concerned mormon. I'm afraid that the evangical's might ask for a constitutional ammendment that won't recognize temple marriage?

That's a very real possibility. Many Evangelicals believe that marriage for eternity is a sacrilige. So, why not ban it, too.

Even if it doesn't get slipped into the current amendment, it definitely sets a bad precident.



Stenar said...

You never know... when you start joining others in going after others outside yourself, you may be the next on their list of people to go after.

Stenar said...

This reminds me of the recent brouhaha over William Jefferson. The Congress has sat idly by as the Bush administration has ridden rough-shod over civil rights in this country in the name of the "war on terror."

Then suddenly, they don't like it much when Bush's Justice dept. goes after one of their own.

Oh, the irony!

Adam said...

I addressed this on your other blog entry, but here it is again. It doesn't matter if the government decides not to recognize temple marriages. In fact, I don't think it does recognize marriage for time and all eternity. What it does do is allow for LDS ecclesiastical leaders to perform the civil marriage that is authorized by the state.

For example, in Paraguay, LDS eccleisaitical leaders are not authorized to perform civil marriages, so before going to the temple to have their religious marriage performed, LDS couples first go to the proper authority to enact their civil marriage (which in Paraguay is a judge). This in no way takes away from the sacredness or the meaning behind the temple marriage. If anything, it demonstrates that the two marriages are indeed separate--one is for state purposes and deals with the rights associated with it by the government; the other is for religious pruposes and deals with the blessings assoicated with it by God.

Bob said...


However, it IS an invalidation of Temple Marriage, of the LDS Church.

My big problem is that as a sacred institution, marriage should be as far away from government as possible.

That is why I am asking my Senators to vote against the amendment.


Adam said...

Then what you are saying is that there should be no marriage laws because there already is a separation.

DemDiva said...

Adam...trolling, flaming, trolling..