Inequality Utah


Photo credit: AdelaMae; Fibonacci

As homosexual activists continue to push their political agenda throughout Utah, the name of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is incessantly invoked, as are its adherents’ perceived endorsements (through public opinion polls) in support of homosexual rights.

[pullquote]Evidently, today’s homosexual activists are so enlightened they can transcend justice and base local ordinances on the thoughts (“perceptions”) of others.[/pullquote]While this is an easy argument to deconstruct – which Sutherland Institute will do in anticipation of a new push for statewide nondiscrimination ordinances during the 2012 legislative session – I have a question: Do Latter-day Saints believe in passing laws based on what a person thinks? 

Homosexuals argue that their “sexual orientation” is a feeling or an attraction, independent and exclusive of sexual behavior. Nondiscrimination ordinances, such as those approved by the Salt Lake City Council in 2010 (and endorsed in Salt Lake City by the LDS Church), contain a “perception clause”: a person cannot discriminate against another person based on “perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Of course, the “perception clause” is one of the primary injustices of this sort of law. How does anyone know what another person is thinking? Normally, a person would tell you what she’s thinking. Under the constraints of these nondiscrimination ordinances, the “victim” will tell the accused what the accused is thinking.

In light of this preposterous legal position, I was reminded of Alma, Chapter 30, in the Book of Mormon:

Now there was no law against a man’s beliefs; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds…

Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; or rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him; but if he did not believe in Him there was no law to punish him.

But if he murdered he was punished unto death; and if he robbed he was also punished; and if he stole he was also punished; and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished.

For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal ground. (Alma 30:7, 9-11)

According to the Book of Mormon, under God’s law applied civilly in that time and place of history, there were no laws against thoughts. In fact, to create such laws placed citizens on “unequal ground.” In addition, crimes were recognized only as human action (not feelings, not attractions) – a standard that placed all citizens on “equal grounds.”

Evidently, today’s homosexual activists are so enlightened they can transcend justice and base local ordinances on the thoughts (“perceptions”) of others. In other words, homosexual activists get to play out their lives in their heads (feelings and attractions) without consequence but, for the rest of us, our minds are to be read by strangers with severe consequences. In any other day and age, that incongruence would be deemed “unequal grounds,” or inequality.

To punctuate this point, Salt Lake City was recently bestowed the honor of the “Gayest City in America.” The criteria? Does Salt Lake City have the “gayest” feelings in the nation? Does Salt Lake City have the most people with same-sex attraction? No, those characteristics aren’t a part of the bestowal – nor could they be given you can’t measure feelings and attractions.

The criteria for the award are human behaviors. The equation for being the “Gayest City in America” is the number of homosexuals elected to public office + does the city have a WNBA team + the number of competitors in the “International Mr. Leather” competition + the number of “Imperial Court” chapters (you’ll just have to read about this to believe it) + the number of teams that competed in the “Gay Softball World Series” + the number of bookstores catering to homosexuals + the existence of a nude yoga class + laws protecting “transgender” people + the number of concert performances since 2008 by Gossip, the Cliks and the Veronicas … divided by population.

Evidently, those criteria represent “gay.” Frankly, those odd (even stereotypical) criteria would be easier to protect with nondiscrimination ordinances than feelings and attractions, especially ones “perceived as.”