 |
 |
The Mormon Church is Fighting Civil Unions in Hawaii (HB444)
Breaking ... Hawaii Civil Unions bill dies in Senate:
Why?
<-- Hi, Frank. Why, Frank?
Keori has the latest HB444 news here.
And if you've not yet read the story of Hawaii Mormon Debi Hartmann, please do.
Here's Debi (at the 4:25 mark):
Why?
With all the controversy surrounding the LDS Church's involvement in the Proposition 8 election in California last fall, a more subtle dust-up was brewing at the Hawaii State Legislature last month, pretty much over the same thing.More Mormons like Sister Briscoe, please.
Hawaii resident Leonor Briscoe was fired up enough over an e-mail exchange with a neighbor that she forwarded copies to her friends, including some Utah residents she believed would be interested in the issue.
The exchange began with an e-mail she got from Frank Lueder, also of Hawaii [Makakilo Hawaii Stake Clerk], that informed her of HB444, a bill before the Hawaii Legislature that "is attempting to once again legalize same-sex marriage but under a new term, 'civil union.' If you wish relay your OPPOSITION to it, you could do so by [calling or e-mailing] your representative. You could access the list of ... House of Representatives from the e-mail address I just gave."
Briscoe, who is LDS, responded: "In the hierarchical, authoritarian structure of the Mormon church, there's no way you would be sending out e-mails about HB444 without the implied or expressed sanction of the leaders of the Mormon Church.
"You do not know me and I do not know you, so the only way you could have gotten my e-mail address is through your stake clerk's access to church stake records, which are not supposed to be used for political or commercial purposes."
<-- Hi, Frank. Why, Frank?
Keori has the latest HB444 news here.
And if you've not yet read the story of Hawaii Mormon Debi Hartmann, please do.
Here's Debi (at the 4:25 mark):
Evidence of Joseph Smith's Resurrection: You can't argue with science
Mormon mental health break:
SCIENCE!
And a fresh (and footnoted) timeline of Mormon involvement in Prop 8, courtesy of the good folks at Mormons for Marriage.
And, just for fun, here's another gratuitous Mormon link for your/my amusement.
And now that I've had my lighthearted fun, let's get back down to business.
Read this and report: The LDS Church, Proposition 8, and the Federal Law of Charities
Why is it that micro-targeting only comes cheap if you're Mormon?
SCIENCE!
And a fresh (and footnoted) timeline of Mormon involvement in Prop 8, courtesy of the good folks at Mormons for Marriage.
And, just for fun, here's another gratuitous Mormon link for your/my amusement.
And now that I've had my lighthearted fun, let's get back down to business.
Read this and report: The LDS Church, Proposition 8, and the Federal Law of Charities
Why is it that micro-targeting only comes cheap if you're Mormon?
Mormongate II
Air America interview with Fred Karger:
And a new Salt Lake Tribune story: New charges made over LDS Church role in Prop 8
Fresh "Mormongate" Daily Kos diary.
Updates to Fred Karger's FPPC complaint.
New batch of 1995-98 internal LDS documents discussing the church's campaign against marriage equality in Hawaii, including mentions of early discussions re California.
By the way, watch this vid and pay attention to
Debi Hartmann (at the 4:25 mark):
That's Debi. Mormon wife and mother. Former chair of the State Board of Education. In Hawaii.
This Debi.
Debi, it's nice to see a Mormon mom working with your Local 5 union and the Democratic LGBT caucus.
And thank you to the folks in comments who pointed out this excellent Bay Area Reporter online extra: "Marriage opponent regrets past, now supports equality" ...
At least Debi's video is burnin' up the toobz. Check this out:
Ha! We're Big in Taiwan. Take that, MormonTV!
And a new Salt Lake Tribune story: New charges made over LDS Church role in Prop 8
Fresh "Mormongate" Daily Kos diary.
Updates to Fred Karger's FPPC complaint.
New batch of 1995-98 internal LDS documents discussing the church's campaign against marriage equality in Hawaii, including mentions of early discussions re California.
By the way, watch this vid and pay attention to
Debi Hartmann (at the 4:25 mark):
That's Debi. Mormon wife and mother. Former chair of the State Board of Education. In Hawaii.
This Debi.
Debi, it's nice to see a Mormon mom working with your Local 5 union and the Democratic LGBT caucus.
And thank you to the folks in comments who pointed out this excellent Bay Area Reporter online extra: "Marriage opponent regrets past, now supports equality" ...
With the Hawaii Legislature now considering civil unions for same-sex couples, a former leader of the Mormon opposition to same-sex marriage in that state reiterated that she no longer believes what she spent years fighting to defend. Marriage rights, she now says, should be for everyone, though she stops short of actually supporting same-sex marriage.And check out this 2007 Washington Blade article: Change of heart in Hawaii. 2007? OK, so I'm apparently two years late to this story. Oh well.
Throughout a nearly two-hour telephone interview last weekend that was at times emotional, repentant, and remorseful, Debi Hartmann, a former co-chair of an anti-same-sex marriage organization in Hawaii, acknowledged she has come to understand that she was wrong. Marriage rights, she now concludes, should be granted to same-sex couples.
At least Debi's video is burnin' up the toobz. Check this out:
Ha! We're Big in Taiwan. Take that, MormonTV!
MormonTV: LDS manipulation of Social Media and the hyperpolarization of America
Big Love = Big Traffic
As many of you know, I manage the media efforts for the Mormon Church, including Internet marketing. When we became aware of this series, it was recognized as an opportunity for us to tell the truth about Mormonism and Temples. Immediately I started a sponsored search campaign on YouTube, which sent visitors to our MormonTV channel ...Did anyone else notice the below Mormon-sponsored ad after a YouTube search for “Big Love” and “Temple”?
In context:
Which leads me to suspect that the earlier LDS Newsroom release was not about addressing the dilemma of publicity, but rather the opening salvo of an online campaign to draw even more attention to the church.
EXHIBIT A) Prop 8: The Social Media-savvy Side of a (Mormon) Campaign to Protect Marriage
EXHIBIT B) Big Love: LDS Media Talk: Response to the Why Mormons Build Temples Video
OBJECTION) Bill Paxton: Big Love is not TV:
REBUTTAL) Tom Hanks: No, it's definitely TV:
CLOSING ARGUMENT) Me: This is getting ridiculous.
You're all TV, got it?
And that includes all you churches that are spending your followers' dollars to ask me to watch your videos.
So, I agree with your calling it MormonTV: http://www.youtube.com/MormonTV ...
But I thought your ad told me not to believe TV?
Q.E.D.
And those who might disagree are always welcome to drop in (as they apparently already have):
But as long as you're dropping in, why not leave a comment?
Prop. 8 Press Sec. Sonja Eddings Brown issues "Big Love" instructions
A trio of Big Love episode 33 reviews that I enjoyed reading today:
Obligatory Big Love Post
“Big Love”: Bigger Message
"Big Love," the Temple, and What is Sacred
Now, back to Sonja's instructions ...
------ Forwarded Message
From: Sonja Eddings Brown /sebmedia@msn.com/
Date: Sunday, March 08, 2009 9:49 PM
To: Chino Blanco
Subject: We do not want to increase the exposure to Big Love by responding to HBO
Public Affairs Representatives:
Many of you will see or hear about the impending broadcast of LDS Temple ceremonies and exploitation of our sacred temple clothes by HBO "Big Love" this week. TV Guide will deliver an ad showing one of the "Big Love" polygamist wives dressed in full temple clothes. It is already circulating on the internet. As has been their practice, the creators of "Big Love" hijack our customs and sacred symbols and misrepresent them in settings of their own making. Please be aware that the executives of HBO made a commitment to the LDS Church at the outset of "Big Love" that they would never desecrate our sacred rites or clothing in promotion or in their drama.
Our Church leaders are fully informed and are considering whether to dignify the show with a response.
The head writer of "Big Love" this season, is Dustin Black, the recent Oscar-winner for "Milk." Raised a Mormon, he is clearly versed in our culture.
Brothers and Sisters, "Big Love" is not a ratings winner and we don't wish to build their ratings for them. TV Guide does not experience the readership it once had. Some of your friends and neighbors will see the images in print and see our temple ceremonies acted out in the drama. Perhaps the greatest position of strength for us, is to stand by our beliefs and teach the gospel. No, HBO does not represent accurately the sacred dress or beliefs or ceremonies of the LDS Church. Yes, like the Catholics, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists and many other faiths, we do have some sacred ceremonial clothing for our Temples.
Our Temples are places where we unite our families forever. They are places where we go to learn the highest principles of character, honor, and devotion to God. That's what we can share with our neighbors and friends, and that kind of answer will no doubt....satisfy their questions.
Unless otherwise directed, at this sensitive time, I suggest that Public Affairs leaders NOT urge response to the TV Guide ad, or to the HBO program.....and avoid increasing the show's ratings or attention.
According to industry sources, "Big Love" will end this season.
Sincerely,
Sonja Eddings Brown
Media Specialist
Southern California Public Affairs Council
(818) 993-1409
* Not to question Sonja's "sources," but HBO has ordered a fourth season of "Big Love." Production will begin later this year, with Season 4 episodes debuting in 2010.
** Fun fact: "Big Love" averages five million viewers.
*** Tinfoil hat fun: Per KIDK's news report, go to http://www.tvguidemagsales.com/ and click on "You've Gotta See This Week's Issue..." in the lower-left corner. Nada. Did somebody deep-six the previously available PDF version of this week's issue of "TV Guide"?
All fun facts and CTs aside: watching that news report, I had to shake my head at this line from the LDS church's statement regarding Big Love Episode 33 aka Outer Darkness:
"There's gonna be lies, and secrets, and discoveries, and problems. Television!"
This sounds about right: No need for an HBO apology on 'Big Love'
As does this: Are ceremonies so sacred, or are Mormons insecure?
And this:
And a media dump:
Obligatory Big Love Post
“Big Love”: Bigger Message
"Big Love," the Temple, and What is Sacred
Now, back to Sonja's instructions ...
------ Forwarded Message
From: Sonja Eddings Brown /sebmedia@msn.com/
Date: Sunday, March 08, 2009 9:49 PM
To: Chino Blanco
Subject: We do not want to increase the exposure to Big Love by responding to HBO
Public Affairs Representatives:
Many of you will see or hear about the impending broadcast of LDS Temple ceremonies and exploitation of our sacred temple clothes by HBO "Big Love" this week. TV Guide will deliver an ad showing one of the "Big Love" polygamist wives dressed in full temple clothes. It is already circulating on the internet. As has been their practice, the creators of "Big Love" hijack our customs and sacred symbols and misrepresent them in settings of their own making. Please be aware that the executives of HBO made a commitment to the LDS Church at the outset of "Big Love" that they would never desecrate our sacred rites or clothing in promotion or in their drama.
Our Church leaders are fully informed and are considering whether to dignify the show with a response.
The head writer of "Big Love" this season, is Dustin Black, the recent Oscar-winner for "Milk." Raised a Mormon, he is clearly versed in our culture.
Brothers and Sisters, "Big Love" is not a ratings winner and we don't wish to build their ratings for them. TV Guide does not experience the readership it once had. Some of your friends and neighbors will see the images in print and see our temple ceremonies acted out in the drama. Perhaps the greatest position of strength for us, is to stand by our beliefs and teach the gospel. No, HBO does not represent accurately the sacred dress or beliefs or ceremonies of the LDS Church. Yes, like the Catholics, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists and many other faiths, we do have some sacred ceremonial clothing for our Temples.
Our Temples are places where we unite our families forever. They are places where we go to learn the highest principles of character, honor, and devotion to God. That's what we can share with our neighbors and friends, and that kind of answer will no doubt....satisfy their questions.
Unless otherwise directed, at this sensitive time, I suggest that Public Affairs leaders NOT urge response to the TV Guide ad, or to the HBO program.....and avoid increasing the show's ratings or attention.
According to industry sources, "Big Love" will end this season.
Sincerely,
Sonja Eddings Brown
Media Specialist
Southern California Public Affairs Council
(818) 993-1409
* Not to question Sonja's "sources," but HBO has ordered a fourth season of "Big Love." Production will begin later this year, with Season 4 episodes debuting in 2010.
** Fun fact: "Big Love" averages five million viewers.
*** Tinfoil hat fun: Per KIDK's news report, go to http://www.tvguidemagsales.com/ and click on "You've Gotta See This Week's Issue..." in the lower-left corner. Nada. Did somebody deep-six the previously available PDF version of this week's issue of "TV Guide"?
All fun facts and CTs aside: watching that news report, I had to shake my head at this line from the LDS church's statement regarding Big Love Episode 33 aka Outer Darkness:
"Certainly church members are offended when their most sacred practices are misrepresented or presented without context or understanding."I remember my first trip to the temple, and I'm not sure there's any context in which I could begin to understand that experience in a positive light. That said, I'm sure there are many faithful LDS who can and do, and to them I'd ask: is there any context in which a secular portrayal of your temple garb or ceremonies would not amount to desecration?
"There's gonna be lies, and secrets, and discoveries, and problems. Television!"
This sounds about right: No need for an HBO apology on 'Big Love'
As does this: Are ceremonies so sacred, or are Mormons insecure?
And this:
What the LDS Church leadership fails to understand is that it does not own my Temple experience. The leadership has done a very good job of cowing members into not discussing the most sacred experience in their lives outside the walls of the Temple (and not very much within). The Church seeks to extend this silence to those of us who used to be members. What the leadership and membership fails to understand is that for those of us who used to be members, the Temple is as much a part of our psyche as it is yours.A very worthy collection of Big Love commentary: Sunday in Outer Blogness: Big News Edition!
I have a very clear statement for President Monson, the General Authorities and LDS Church Public Relations:
You do not own my Temple experience.
I left your church. I am no longer bound by your oaths and covenants. If I choose not to discuss what goes on in the Temple, that’s my choice. It’s also my choice if I want to discuss it. But stop trying to silence us by your alternately sad and outraged statements.
If former members who write for “Big Love” want to write about their Temple experience through the fictional Barb Henrickson, that is their right. I’m sure they’ll give your ceremonies their proper deference, probably far more deference than those ceremonies deserve. (As a former lawyer, the phrase “unconscionable contract” comes to mind when I think of the oaths and covenants of the Temple.) And it is their right to do so.
But stop trying to browbeat us former members into not discussing the experiences we had within your Temple walls. They are part of us and we can talk about them if we want. You do not own our experiences. You do not own US.
— Mirele
And a media dump:
 |
Latest ARIS (American Religious Identification Survey) Stats
Click any graphic below to read the USA Today story.
Since 1990:
No religion +6.8%
Don't Know/Refused +2.9%
Protestant denominations +0.5%
Eastern religions +0.5%
New movements (e.g. Wiccan) +0.4%
Pentecostal/Charsmatic +0.3%
Muslim +0.3%
Mormon +0.0%
Memo to the Media: Please feel free to stop referring to the LDS/Mormon church as one of the fastest-growing churches. It's not and hasn't been for so long that y'all should know better by now. But somehow we still get paragraphs like this in the WaPo coverage of this survey:
In any case, at least the ARIS numbers provide a timely correction of the suspect figures published in the 2009 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches. Per the Yearbook:
And not surprising that actual survey results diverge so widely from the stats reported by the LDS church.
Also not surprising, in light of the latest ARIS numbers, is the decade-long effort on the part of the LDS leadership to align Mormonism with these folks (when all else fails, hitch your wagon to a star):
And a worthy Christian Century article from 2007 here.
The Mormon Social Science Association discusses retention rates here.
And last year's discussion over at Main Street Plaza: Mormon Replacement Rate Negative in United States.
Since 1990:
No religion +6.8%
Don't Know/Refused +2.9%
Protestant denominations +0.5%
Eastern religions +0.5%
New movements (e.g. Wiccan) +0.4%
Pentecostal/Charsmatic +0.3%
Muslim +0.3%
Mormon +0.0%
Memo to the Media: Please feel free to stop referring to the LDS/Mormon church as one of the fastest-growing churches. It's not and hasn't been for so long that y'all should know better by now. But somehow we still get paragraphs like this in the WaPo coverage of this survey:
The survey substantiated several general trends already identified by sociologists: the slipping importance of denomination in America, the growing number of people who say they have "no" religion and the increase in religious minorities including Muslims, Mormons and such movements as Wicca and paganism.A zero percent rise in Mormons as a percentage of the population qualifies as an "increase?"
In any case, at least the ARIS numbers provide a timely correction of the suspect figures published in the 2009 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches. Per the Yearbook:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: 5,873,408 members, up 1.63 percent (Ranked 4).Not 5,873,408 members. Not up 1.63 percent. Not ranked fourth.
And not surprising that actual survey results diverge so widely from the stats reported by the LDS church.
Also not surprising, in light of the latest ARIS numbers, is the decade-long effort on the part of the LDS leadership to align Mormonism with these folks (when all else fails, hitch your wagon to a star):
The growth comes among those who identify themselves as Christian, "evangelical/born again," or "non-denominational Christian." That last group numbers over eight million, up from less than 200,000 in 1990.ARIS summary and updates here.
And a worthy Christian Century article from 2007 here.
The Mormon Social Science Association discusses retention rates here.
And last year's discussion over at Main Street Plaza: Mormon Replacement Rate Negative in United States.
8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION
If you're looking for the Reed Cowan interview about his documentary 8: The Mormon Proposition please CLICK HERE.
Feel free to watch a few video clips of local Utah TV news reports about 8: The Mormon Proposition before clicking through to the interview.
Below is the original post from March, 2009, which was about LDS meddling in the Illinois civil union debate ...
Otherwise, take a gander at this latest email:
------ Forwarded Message
From: (redacted)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009
To: (redacted)
Subject: Nauvoo Ward Spreading Lies/Fear to Oppose Civil Unions
The following official email was just sent out (via the LDS Church
website) to all the members of the Nauvoo 3rd Ward, as approved by
Kristy Combs, ward website administrator, and by Bishop Chris Church
of the Nauvoo 3rd Ward. (Because it was sent through the LDS
website, it required the authorization of a bishop or higher.)
I am stunned and angered by the misinformation being spread in such
an official church communication through the LDS Church website.
Once again, "our children" are the reason for spreading hatred,
hysteria, and lies.
And did they not get the memo that the LDS Church is not opposed to
civil unions?
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY. And if you live in Illinois, contact your
legislators to support this bill!
________
From: Kristy Combs <kristyc@mchsi.com>
Date: March 3, 2009
Subject: Civil Union bill scheduled for a hearing Thursday - calls
needed
This message has been authorized for sending by Bishop Church.
The Civil Union Bill (HB 2234) has been scheduled for a hearing in
the Youth and Family Committee this week on Thursday, March 5, 2009
at 9:00 a.m. in Springfield. If the bill is voted out of committee,
it becomes eligible for a vote before the full Illinois House of
Representatives. This bill will legalize civil unions in the state
of Illinois, and will treat such civil unions with the same legal
obligations, responsibilities, protections and benefits as are
afforded within marriage. In other words, civil unions will be
different in name only from marriage. As has already been seen in
Massachusetts, this will empower the public schools to begin teaching
this lifestyle to our young children regardless of parental requests
otherwise. It will also create grounds for rewriting all social
mores; the current push in Massachusetts is to recognize and legalize
all transgender rights (An individual in Massachusetts can now change
their drivers license to the gender they believe themselves to be,
regardless of actual gender, which means that confused men and women
are now legally entering one another's bathrooms and locker rooms.
What kind of a safety issue is this for our children?). Furthermore,
while the bill legalizes civil unions, it will be used in the courts
to show discrimination and will ultimately lead to court mandated
same-sex marriages.
To help defeat this bill, please call your state representative and
state senator and ask that they support traditional marriage and vote
against the civil unions bill. If you are unsure who your
legislators are, please see the link at the end of this email.
Also, please take a moment and call the following members of the
Youth and Family Committee to encourage them to vote no on this
bill. We need 4 votes to keep it from passing out of the committee.
And - as always, please pass this on to all who believe in protecting
our families and our children. If you are interested in attending
the hearing, it will be held on Thursday, March 5th at 9:00 a.m. in
Springfield in Room 122B of the Capitol Building (I can give you
directions to the Capitol Building if needed).
Members of the Youth and Family Committee:
Rep. Greg Harris (D-Chicago) (Greg Harris is also the sponsor of
this bill, but he needs to hear your opposition to this bill)
Chairperson
217-782-3835
Rep. LaShawn K. Ford (D-Chicago)
Vice-Chairperson
217-782-5962
Rep. Mike Fortner (R-West Chicago)
Republican Spokesperson
217-782-1653
Rep. William D. Burns (D-Chicago)
217-782-2023
Rep. Michael P. McAuliffe (R-Chicago)
217-782-8182
Rep. Al Riley (D-Matteson)
217-558-1007
Rep. Dave Winters (R-Rockford)
217-782-0455
Directions for identifying your legislators:
You can use the following link to identify your state legislators and
their contact information: http://www.elections.il.gov/
DistrictLocator/SelectSearchType.aspx?NavLink=1 (and enter your 9
digit zip code). If this link doesn't work, you can use the general
link www.ilga.gov and then click on " legislator lookup" near the
bottom of the page, then click on "by zip+4". Type in your zip code,
and you'll see a list of your legislators. You want your state
senator and state representative as they will be the ones voting on
the bill.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sister Combs
------------
Update: I just noticed that Jim Burroway over at Box Turtle Bulletin posted this earlier as EXCLUSIVE: Mormon Machine Cranking Up Against Illinois Civil Unions Bill
And now I see that Rainey beat me to the punch over at dKos as well with her LDS now wants to shut down civil unions in IL diary.
Good. Glad to see it. Because this is just crazy. I'm pleading here: can someone - anyone - from LDS Church HQ please clarify your organization's position on civil unions?
Is it the position that Utah Gov. Huntsman recently staked out (he's for 'em)? Or does it more closely resemble that of Bishop Church and the Nauvoo 3rd Ward (they're apparently against 'em)?
Civil Unions? Yes? No? Maybe so?
Memo to Salt Lake: How are the rest of us supposed to have any kind of civil dialogue with a church that refuses to make its own position known? Enough with the guessing games already. You've got your own members running around telling everyone who will listen that their church is not anti-gay, that civil unions sound like a reasonable compromise, and then you pull a stunt like this. Pathetic.
Feel free to watch a few video clips of local Utah TV news reports about 8: The Mormon Proposition before clicking through to the interview.
Below is the original post from March, 2009, which was about LDS meddling in the Illinois civil union debate ...
Otherwise, take a gander at this latest email:
------ Forwarded Message
From: (redacted)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009
To: (redacted)
Subject: Nauvoo Ward Spreading Lies/Fear to Oppose Civil Unions
The following official email was just sent out (via the LDS Church
website) to all the members of the Nauvoo 3rd Ward, as approved by
Kristy Combs, ward website administrator, and by Bishop Chris Church
of the Nauvoo 3rd Ward. (Because it was sent through the LDS
website, it required the authorization of a bishop or higher.)
I am stunned and angered by the misinformation being spread in such
an official church communication through the LDS Church website.
Once again, "our children" are the reason for spreading hatred,
hysteria, and lies.
And did they not get the memo that the LDS Church is not opposed to
civil unions?
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY. And if you live in Illinois, contact your
legislators to support this bill!
________
From: Kristy Combs <kristyc@mchsi.com>
Date: March 3, 2009
Subject: Civil Union bill scheduled for a hearing Thursday - calls
needed
This message has been authorized for sending by Bishop Church.
The Civil Union Bill (HB 2234) has been scheduled for a hearing in
the Youth and Family Committee this week on Thursday, March 5, 2009
at 9:00 a.m. in Springfield. If the bill is voted out of committee,
it becomes eligible for a vote before the full Illinois House of
Representatives. This bill will legalize civil unions in the state
of Illinois, and will treat such civil unions with the same legal
obligations, responsibilities, protections and benefits as are
afforded within marriage. In other words, civil unions will be
different in name only from marriage. As has already been seen in
Massachusetts, this will empower the public schools to begin teaching
this lifestyle to our young children regardless of parental requests
otherwise. It will also create grounds for rewriting all social
mores; the current push in Massachusetts is to recognize and legalize
all transgender rights (An individual in Massachusetts can now change
their drivers license to the gender they believe themselves to be,
regardless of actual gender, which means that confused men and women
are now legally entering one another's bathrooms and locker rooms.
What kind of a safety issue is this for our children?). Furthermore,
while the bill legalizes civil unions, it will be used in the courts
to show discrimination and will ultimately lead to court mandated
same-sex marriages.
To help defeat this bill, please call your state representative and
state senator and ask that they support traditional marriage and vote
against the civil unions bill. If you are unsure who your
legislators are, please see the link at the end of this email.
Also, please take a moment and call the following members of the
Youth and Family Committee to encourage them to vote no on this
bill. We need 4 votes to keep it from passing out of the committee.
And - as always, please pass this on to all who believe in protecting
our families and our children. If you are interested in attending
the hearing, it will be held on Thursday, March 5th at 9:00 a.m. in
Springfield in Room 122B of the Capitol Building (I can give you
directions to the Capitol Building if needed).
Members of the Youth and Family Committee:
Rep. Greg Harris (D-Chicago) (Greg Harris is also the sponsor of
this bill, but he needs to hear your opposition to this bill)
Chairperson
217-782-3835
Rep. LaShawn K. Ford (D-Chicago)
Vice-Chairperson
217-782-5962
Rep. Mike Fortner (R-West Chicago)
Republican Spokesperson
217-782-1653
Rep. William D. Burns (D-Chicago)
217-782-2023
Rep. Michael P. McAuliffe (R-Chicago)
217-782-8182
Rep. Al Riley (D-Matteson)
217-558-1007
Rep. Dave Winters (R-Rockford)
217-782-0455
Directions for identifying your legislators:
You can use the following link to identify your state legislators and
their contact information: http://www.elections.il.gov/
DistrictLocator/SelectSearchType.aspx?NavLink=1 (and enter your 9
digit zip code). If this link doesn't work, you can use the general
link www.ilga.gov and then click on " legislator lookup" near the
bottom of the page, then click on "by zip+4". Type in your zip code,
and you'll see a list of your legislators. You want your state
senator and state representative as they will be the ones voting on
the bill.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sister Combs
------------
Update: I just noticed that Jim Burroway over at Box Turtle Bulletin posted this earlier as EXCLUSIVE: Mormon Machine Cranking Up Against Illinois Civil Unions Bill
And now I see that Rainey beat me to the punch over at dKos as well with her LDS now wants to shut down civil unions in IL diary.
Good. Glad to see it. Because this is just crazy. I'm pleading here: can someone - anyone - from LDS Church HQ please clarify your organization's position on civil unions?
Is it the position that Utah Gov. Huntsman recently staked out (he's for 'em)? Or does it more closely resemble that of Bishop Church and the Nauvoo 3rd Ward (they're apparently against 'em)?
Civil Unions? Yes? No? Maybe so?
Memo to Salt Lake: How are the rest of us supposed to have any kind of civil dialogue with a church that refuses to make its own position known? Enough with the guessing games already. You've got your own members running around telling everyone who will listen that their church is not anti-gay, that civil unions sound like a reasonable compromise, and then you pull a stunt like this. Pathetic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
SUBSCRIBE | FOLLOW
Posts
All Comments
