05 February 2009

Alan Was Right Again

A few days ago I waxed snarky about the tag line in the Church's press release that left a hole so big you could sail the Titanic through it: no objection to a variety of rights for same-sex couples as long as they didn't "infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches." Gotta hand it to whoever wrote that, it's slipperier than Bill Clinton in a press conference.

It wasn't rocket science to deduce that the Common Ground Initiative died because the Church's silence on it spoke volumes. I concluded that its opponents believed it was exactly what the Church's press release said, an infringement "on the integrity of the traditional family."

And whaddaya know, guess what kids. The Sutherland Institute, which obviously doesn't hesitate to rush in where the Church fears to tread, now says that's exactly what the Common Ground Initiative meant to do: impinge on the "traditional family." "I believe their ultimate goal," spokesman Jeff Reynolds said, "is to provide a way where same-sex marriage is legal in Utah." There it is, exactly as your humble correspondent predicted. The Titanic-sized opt-out clause in full resplendence. Click here for the full story.

The Sutherland Institute was founded in 1995 by the ironically named Gaylord Swim. From the looks of its Web site, it wants to be a Utah-centric Focus On The Family type organization with some libertarian politics thrown in. And everyone in Utah knows libertarian leaning is The Only True Political Perspective Acceptable to God, right? BYU-connected policy wonks and business managers abound in Sutherland's leadership--more of the fatal shift Hugh Nibley warned against.

Obviously Sutherland's ready to say what the Church isn't willing to. They bear watching.

3 comments:

Abelard Enigma said...

"I believe their ultimate goal," spokesman Jeff Reynolds said, "is to provide a way where same-sex marriage is legal in Utah."

Uh, don't you already have a constitutional amendment in place guaranteeing that cannot happen?

Although, I guess I really shouldn't be surprised. Even with proposition 8, which was solely focused on defining marriage as between a man and a woman - proponents argued that it's defeat would require school curriculums to change, churches required to recognize, and even perform, same sex marriages, The LDS church would have to close all of its temples in California (seriously, I saw that in an email that was being forwarded around), and students would be required to engage in both same sex and opposite sex relationship before marriage to make sure they knew their true orientation (OK, I made this last one up - but there have been psychologists proposing that)

Non-Dairy Creamer said...

Wouldn't you just love to see an alternative think-tank to the Sutherland Institute emerge in Utah?

It takes a few hours for me to read the things the publish because I have to take breaks to cool my anger and then rebut everything they do. It can be downright scary how much influence groups like that have in Utah.

Grant Haws said...

It always scares me how those emails and the groups that unleash them, describing the apocalypse that will unfold in the event of same-sex rights, are considered completely truthful by some. It's scary to see people you know turn out to be so ridiculously fooled...simply because they want to believe it.