Alright my fellows, I am glad that once again the state of Ca. went about something in the democratic way and what- we feel- is the Lord's way. That said, I have seen it noted a few times that the Church is not against a civil union even including property rights, visitation rights and insurance. Can anyone quote me where we (LDS) make the distinction? Is it just the name that is important, is it the millenia that stand behind the term or what?
Part of my objection to even civil unions was that I knew it would never be enough. Tolerance no longer means tolerance. It means accept it or have your church unlawfully and violently protested against.
Society, i. e. country, nation state, etc., has a right to protect that which is best to perpetuate itself and the continuation of its way of life. Marriage is one of these things. Prop. 8 defined and encouraged that. A man and a woman get married have children- generally-teach their children how to live in that society and promote what it is good about it. This can perpetuate itself. Same gender unions/marriage cannot perpetuate w/o adoption, science or indoctrination. If we were animals, it would die out in a generation. In animals, it does die out.
Help a brother out. :)