This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2004, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
So the LDS Church announced its support July 7 for a constitutional amendment protecting marriage as an institution solely between a man and a woman, and some people are reacting as if this were heresy. Why should anyone be surprised when the church's stand has always been that homosexuality is a sin?
Love the sinner but shun the sin, I believe is the protocol. One cannot change the protocol to tolerate what is, at the root, a sinful act. We might compare the changing winds to an increasingly popular notion that Christ was married during his mortal life. The jury's still out, but suppose we pursue the prevailing logic of today's tolerant society to a conclusion? The marriage would not be with Mary of Magdala, but a more progressive gay marriage. Why not go all the way, then, and make it a polygamist union with Peter, James and John? Wouldn't that put today's logic on its ear? That is the logic of heresy.
How about plain, simple truth for a change? Marriage is not a right to be shared by anyone who's earned it merely by being. It is a sacred union between a man and a woman with sacred responsibilities that far overshadow the whims of tolerance. I believe the LDS Church's “Proclamation on the Family” ought to comprise the text of the proposed amendment.
Richard Cheney
Roy