The Divine Institution of Marriage

The Chuch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has recently released a new 6-page document entitled The Divine Institution of Marriage.  Per the Church:

“The Church has a single, undeviating standard of sexual morality: intimate relations are proper only between a husband and a wife united in the bonds of matrimony.  

The Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility towards homosexual men and women. Protecting marriage between a man and a woman does not affect Church members’ Christian obligations of love, kindness and humanity toward all people.

As Church members decide their own appropriate level of involvement in protecting marriage between a man and a woman, they should approach this issue with respect for others, understanding, honesty, and civility.

Intending to reduce misunderstanding and ill will, the Church has produced the following document, “The Divine Institution of Marriage,” and provided the accompanying links to other materials, to explain its reasons for defending marriage between a man and a woman as an issue of moral imperative. ”

To read The Divine Institution of Marriage, visit

Often times, when talking about why the Church is against gay marriage, people will ask “What’s the harm?” or “They’re not bothering you.”  To those who believe that, read NPR’s When Gay Rights and Religious Liberties Clash.

What do you think?  Is this a cause the Church and its members should be fighting for?

Follow the Prophet?

How do members of the Church know when to follow the council of the Prophet?  The reason I ask is that the 1st Presidency had a letter read on Sunday, June 29, 2008, in Sacrament Meeting in Church units in the State of California.  There are many on the Internet who believes that this is a “political issue” and as a result, the Church shouldn’t be talking about this issue.

Continue reading

Gibbon's file for divorce

Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons (R) today filed for divorce from his wife, Dawn.  It is always sad when two people who have been married for 22-years (and have a child) end up having to end their marriage.  I wish both of them the best.  I hope that this is not a new scandal for the Governor, who has little political capital left, but, I believe, is doing a good job as Governor.

Sources: Review-Journal, Wikipedia, Jon Ralston

Time and All Eternity

So, the Wife and I last night were studying in the Scriptures.  We started talking about being married for Time and All Eternity.  In the Church, we believe that if one is married by the proper authority, they can be married not just until death do you part, but forever.  As I said a moment ago, for “Time and All Eternity”.  So, time would be for your mortal life.  Amanda & I are married for time, which means from now until the day we die.  We are also married for All Eternity, which means forever.  I had an interesting thought on this subject, which I shared with her.  We don’t say “married for time and for eternity from this point on”.  We say for “all eternity”.  Does that mean that this marriage covenant is retroactive?  Are we married now, because of this temple sealing, all the way back to the beginning of time?  Were we married when we first met each other back our Senior year of high school because of this temple sealing that we made 5 1/2 years later?

I’m planning on studying this out a little more and then, I’ll post a more complete version, along with some scriptures, at

The Gay Marriage Amendment

The Gay Marriage Amendment did not receive the 2/3 votes needed in the Senate to pass. In fact, it only got 49 votes. Even had it past, it still would have had to go to the States to ratify it.

Here in Nevada, Senator Ensign voted for it while Senator Reid voted against it. Many Democrats have claimed that the Republicans are doing it as a publicity stunt to draw out the conservative base. Well, the way I see it, if its an important issue (as it is to me) then I think it should be talked about… a lot.

I will remember how Senator Reid voted the next time he is up for reelection.

Marriage Protection Amendment

Today, I visited the Religious Coalition for Marriagewebsite and sent an e-mail to both Nevada Senators about Senate Joint Resolution 1, the Marriage Protection Amendment. This amendment would add the following as an amendment to the US Constitution: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.” I am in favor of this.

Our country is in the middle of a war. This war is over morals. This was is about what is right and wrong.