Shutting Up Churches

A long standing approach by liberals or so-called progressives is to use labels, and yet they are the ones that so often complain about the use of them. In the case of the Mormon church being involved in politics they often say something like the following:

“If the Mormon church or any other church wants to be involved in politics then they should give up their tax exempt status.”

Or they, the liberals want to take that tax exempt status away from the church in order to shut people up. In other words they threaten the church, “to be seen and not heard.” Politically castrating the churches role in society. A common tactic use in Europe and other socialist countries.

Liberals have a habit of claiming that a church does not have a right to say anything on a Moral issue once it becomes a political one. Marriage is a example of this. Not long ago, Gays would not even attempt to enter a marriage believing that the institution was the root cause of so much pain to them.

The whole make up of these types of marriages have lend themselves to abuse of the extended family or children involved in the relationships either adopted or whatever. It is a disaster waiting to happen, with complications that far out way heterosexual marriages.

One blogger indicated that something I would assume maybe right and that is the ultimate ending of marriage as a recognizable entity in California and most states, over the fact that the people of California have spoken.

This would in most aspects end not only marriage, but also divorces or for that matter child support. leaving it to the State to raise our children and co-opting marital and parental responsibility. This is all for the sake of making a institution between a man and a woman equal to all or what they think is equal?

For those who think this is simple by just extending the definition, have another thing coming. For those who feel the Mormon church or any church involved would be solved if tax exempt status was taken away have another bag of worms to be opened.

So if the Mormon church lost their tax exempted status they would in affect become a mouth piece for the state, a status where speech could be dictated under IRS laws and government interference.

What wold occur under this situations is preaching from the government. Closing down the church would become easy and like businesses a new more respectable “governmental” Church President wold become likely. Naturally the Mormon church is not going to stop talking about issues that effect the members belonging to it, and no amount of demonstrating would alter what it as a church feels is a Moral issue. This of course the same reasoning they are using for abortion.

Of course, many use the old tired red herring in the Mormon church’s past history with polygamy and of course Liberals excuse for the destruction of marriage on the whole. It is another interesting fact that Polygamy on the was never Gay. Even if those who use the excuse as a reason for alternative marriage it is in essence a silly argument and without merit since the Mormon Church gave up the practice more than a hundred years ago. The whole concept of shutting up a church on moral issues is amazing to me.

Churches on the whole expose Slavery as a Moral wrong, I realized some would jump onto this statement as a excuse for Gay marriage issue, but in this case the church is protecting a Moral issue in the same matter as it did when dealing with slavery.

For those who claim that gay marriage should find protection under the United States Constitution need to attend school to understand what is protected under this document.

Marriage, between a man and a woman, is protected as a fundamental right, having its foundation in both the history and traditions of this great nation. Homosexuality, however, has no such foundation. To the contrary, this conduct has a long history of being condemned and punished.

As such, it is not afforded the same protection as heterosexual marriage. This was why interracial marriage, although previously condemned, was legalized. Those who sought to be married to persons of other races still sought to enter this institution as a man and a woman.

Also, the equal protections clause of the fourteenth amendment does not protect against all forms of discrimination. The discrimination must come from the state government, or someone empowered to act by the state, and the discrimination usually is against a protected class. This includes race, national origin, gender, disability, etc. Homosexuals are not a protected class. and do not qualify for protection as such.

Sorry, but sometimes the truth hurts!