
More than a few disgruntled and unhappy observers have characterized the ongoing efforts by our church leadership to gain constitutional status for key aspects of the "Proclamation on the Family" like the civil rights struggle of the 60's and the question of Blacks and the priesthood. Elder Ezra Taft benson was certain, at the time, that the Communists were intent on destroying America through the civil rights movement. We cannot use that excuse now as the Commies are gone so they cannot be backing the agenda of the GLBTG community. At the height of the civil rights movement in the 60's, the foremost scholar and theologian of the Church was Joseph Fielding Smith. He was President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles to more moderate President David O. McKay, the president of my youth. Asked whether there was a place for Negroes in the LDS Church, he, JFS, responded by saying, "The darkies are a good people and there is place for them in this church." Elder Harold B. Lee, who would later become President of the Church, and the decision maker during the tenure of President Joseph Fielding Smith, following President McKay's death, chastised then BYU President Ernest Wilkinson for allowing Blacks to attend BYU. He threatened Wilkinson with responsibility if his granddaughter attending BYU should become 'interested' in a colored young man. So extreme were his views that he questioned whether blood supplies in SLC for LDS Hospital were obtained from any donors of African descent. Such tainted blood carried the 'curse of Cain' apparently. Further, Harold B. Lee vowed that during his lifetime he would insure that Blacks would never receive the priesthood. The interesting conclusion one could reach about that is that he served fewer months than any other president of the church and was replaced by Spencer W. Kimball who sought and received change that came in the revelation of June 1978.
Studying the introduction, perpetuation, and conclusion of plural or Celestial Marriage in the church, I honestly believe we would or there would be a few still practicing it today had not the federal government intervened to the point of extinction of this church in causing the ending the practice. The Manifesto did not prevent President Wilford Woodruff from following a belly dancer, who performed for him in Salt Lake City, to San Francisco where he secretly 'married' her. Marriage defined as between 'one man and one woman' in the days before the First Manifesto and the Second Manifesto would have been rejected quickly and anyone advocating that would have been in jeopardy.
The recent Republican primary election in Utah and the loss of immigration moderate Chris Cannon to Jason "the Ghengis" Chaffetz, in arguably the most conservative of all congressional districts in the US, (Utah's 3rd), suggests his constituency is very much ethnically challenged as to persons of the Brown color. That district must be near 100% Mormon. The track record of our Utah legislature is equally abysmal as they introduced one bill after another to marginalize Hispanics here. There is no question from my experience and observations with Latino members there is an undercurrent in our Utah Mormon middle class culture of ethnic animosity. I believe this current of animosity, coupled with the fear of someone's activist agenda and just plain homophobic views helps us to understand what has propelled us a a church to this point, giving rise to the letter and subsequent efforts to restore the law banning Gay marriage in CA.
From my study of church history and my knowledge as a lifetime practitioner, apologist, and advocate, I would conclude the following:
1. Membership and our leadership are very slow to change, i.e. nearly 140 years in righting the wrongs of the personal prejudices grafted into church practice following the death of the Prophet Joseph Smith by his successors, principally Brigham Young.
2. Membership and the present leadership are very much influenced by the 'culture of fear' here in America. It is with uncertainty and trepidation they view and feel threatened by events such as the recent CA Supreme Court decision concerning Gay marriage. It may portend the coming wave that will sweep across the land threatening traditional marriage everywhere.
3. LDS Church leadership responds to threats, direct or implied, from state or federal governments. This battle between the forces of conservatism and 'family values' in California or any other state will not be won by any other means than a real or perceived threat to the tax exempt status of the Church. They will move quickly and stop funding efforts to support Prop 22 and like battles if there is a possibility of losing exempt status.
4. Lastly, our leaders are fallible and often speak and do so from their own experience, as I freely admit I am and do. Not always are they inspired or do they speak the 'will of the Lord'. Who can deny the off kilter doctrinal statements of Brigham Young in teaching the so-called Adam God theory? On what basis did we deny persons of color for nearly a century and a half the blessings of the priesthood?
Will change occur on this matter in the Church? Not in my lifetime, except and only unless the tax exempt status is threatened. Will writing letters to the Brethren bring about change? No. What am I going to do about it? In a private way, (as I do not want to formally compromise my status), I will support financially and otherwise, the efforts of any who would oppose the coalition, (including my church), to pass legislation such as Prop 22. I will continue to contemplate the matter and seek illumination. The process works and resolution may come.









