The LDS Newsroom has great interviews with and statements by the Prophets and Apostles on vital matters. I’ll be looking through it and doing write ups. Here Public Affairs interviews Elders Oaks on homo-marriage. I highly recommend looking over the site, but for now, here’s a few excerpts on this topic with more to come:
(P.s. Elder Oaks recieved his J.D. from the University of Chicago and served as a Utah Supreme Court justice before his calling as an Apostle for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) .
PUBLIC AFFAIRS: On the issue of a Constitutional amendment prohibiting same-gender marriage, there are some Latter-day Saints who are opposed to same-gender marriage, but who are not in favor of addressing this through a Constitutional amendment. Why did the Church feel that it had to step in that direction?
ELDER OAKS: Law has at least two roles: one is to define and regulate the limits of acceptable behavior. The other is to teach principles for individuals to make individual choices. The law declares unacceptable some things that are simply not enforceable, and there’s no prosecutor who tries to enforce them. We refer to that as the teaching function of the law. The time has come in our society when I see great wisdom and purpose in a United States Constitutional amendment declaring that marriage is between a man and a woman. There is nothing in that proposed amendment that requires a criminal prosecution or that directs the attorneys general to go out and round people up, but it declares a principle and it also creates a defensive barrier against those who would alter that traditional definition of marriage.
There are people who oppose a federal Constitutional amendment because they think that the law of family should be made by the states. I can see a legitimate argument there. I think it’s mistaken, however, because the federal government, through the decisions of life-tenured federal judges, has already taken over that area. This Constitutional amendment is a defensive measure against those who would ignore the will of the states appropriately expressed and require, as a matter of federal law, the recognition of same-gender marriages — or the invalidation of state laws that require that marriage be between a man and a woman. In summary, the First Presidency has come out for an amendment (which may or may not be adopted) in support of the teaching function of the law. Such an amendment would be a very important expression of public policy, which would feed into or should feed into the decisions of judges across the length and breadth of the land.
An official Letter from the First Presidency:
Letter from First Presidency of the Church to Church Leaders in the United States
We are informed that the United States Senate will on June 6, 2006, vote on an amendment to the Federal constitution designed to protect the traditional institution of marriage.
We, as the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, have repeatedly set forth our position that the marriage of a man and a woman is the only acceptable marriage relationship.
In 1995 we issued a Proclamation to the World on this matter, and have repeatedly reaffirmed that position.
In that proclamation we said: “We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”
We urge our members to express themselves on this urgent matter to their elected representatives in the Senate.
Gordon B. Hinckley: There is no justification to redefine what marriage is. Such is
not our right, and those who try will find themselves answerable to God. Some portray legalization of so-called same-sex marriage as a civil right. This is not a matter of civil rights; it is a matter of morality. Others question our constitutional right as a church to raise our voice on an issue that is of critical importance to the future of the family. We believe that defending this sacred institution by working to preserve traditional marriage lies clearly within our religious and constitutional prerogatives. Indeed, we are compelled by our doctrine to speak out. (Gordon B. Hinckley, “Why We Do Some of the Things We Do,” Ensign, Nov. 1999, 52 )
Another article says:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has sent a letter to its congregational leaders throughout the United States, urging members to “express themselves” on a forthcoming vote in the United States Senate relating to the definition of marriage.
The letter, signed by the First Presidency of the Church — the faith’s highest governing body — draws attention to the Senate vote scheduled for 6 June on an amendment to the federal Constitution that would “protect the traditional institution of marriage.” It will be read to congregations at the start of Church services this Sunday.
“We, as the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, have repeatedly set forth our position that the marriage of a man and a woman is the only acceptable marriage relationship,” the letter says.
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Protect the Sanctity of the Family.
