Personally I don’t see this as an issue of being “in favor” of gay marriage. I don’t “favor” gay marriage; it’s definitely not for me. Likewise, I don’t “favor” Mormon temple marriages with their exclusionary practice of dividing part-member families. And I’m not particularly fond of marriages where everyone wears a toga, wreath around their head, and bare feet, either. But whether or not I’m personally “in favor” of such marriages isn’t really the question. Rather, I think the debate is better (and more accurately framed) in terms of tolerance and support of basic human rights, and the very nature of human rights is that these are aspects that we accept/tolerate whether or not we are “in favor” of them.

So I support the right of Mormons to assemble in church meetings. I believe this is their constitutional right. However, I’m most certainly not “in favor” of Mormon Sacrament Meetings. I think Mormon meetings are filled with stupidity. The typical Sacrament Meeting is an exercise is logical fallacies, superstition, and a virtual orgy of absurdity. I think these Mormon meetings are a *horrendous* waste of time. But I’d gladly fight in a war to protect their constitutional freedom to engage in their preferred stupidity because I value the fundamental right to live one’s life according to the dictates of one’s beliefs.

One of the reasons (I think) that Mormons oppose Gay Marriage is that they feel (wrongly) that it’s a sin to tolerate something they think is a sin. Thus, if Mormons feel it’s a sin to shop on Sunday, then shopping on Sunday should be illegal (I actually remember when they taught this). If Mormons feel it’s a sin for mothers to work outside the home, then working mothers should be illegal (as in the church’s overthrow of the Equal Rights Amendment). We see leaders of the church muddle through this same confused line of thinking when they try to invoke their religious faith as reason for depriving Gays the right of a civil marriage; they think it’s wrong for Gays to marry, so they think it should be illegal for Gays to marry. These geriatric con men subscribe whole heartedly to the notion that it’s okay for them to make something illegal if they are not personally “in favor” of it (i.e., if they think it’s a sin).

The idea that people should advocate for laws against behavior they are personally opposed to, is intractably at odds with the notion of inalienable and fundamental rights. These folks just don’t get it — we should support fundamental and inalienable rights whether or not we are “in favor” of them.

I believe *that* is the point; not whether you are “in favor” of Gay marriage, but whether or not you support civil rights. If Mormons don’t want to practice Gay marriages, that’s their sacred right. They should be entitled to it. But it’s the height of hypocrisy/selfishness/cowardice for Mormons to assert *their* civil rights while fighting to deny others the same rights.

What Mormons (and other superstitious people) need to understand is that they *owe* the rest of the country the same level of tolerance and accommodation with respect to civil liberties that we gladly give to them. Mormons need to understand that support of civil liberties does not equate to support of the specific activities that are practiced under the protective umbrella of civil rights; it’s just a matter of supporting the concept of “freedom and agency for all.”

I believe we should always frame the issue in terms of civil rights, while avoiding acceptance (implied or expressed) of the LDS propaganda that support for civil rights equates to “favoring” the activities that people choose when exercising their civil rights.

Anyway, that’s my $0.02.

Duwayne Anderson
Author of “Farewell to Eden: Coming to terms with Mormonism and science”
American Quarter Horse: The ultimate all-terrain vehicle