Legal Recognition Of Temple Sealings
vs. Civil Same-Sex Marriage Ceremonies
In the vast majority of countries around the world, LDS
temple sealings are not recognized by those governments. In
those countries, LDS have a brief marriage ceremony, often
in an LDS chapel adjacent to the temple if one is found in
that country. Afterwards, the couple goes straight to the
temple, either across the parking lot or across an ocean,
and is sealed there for time and all eternity.
If an American state, in which there was a temple, likewise
prohibited weddings done in private, do you think that the
Church would simply rollover on this or would they send in
lawyers and lobbyists to try to kill or overturn such a
law? Would they claim that such a ban would be an
infringement on their religious freedoms? You bet! Could
the state claim that the couple can still go to the temple
for whatever type of ceremony that their religion requires?
If they go without a public wedding, they will still be
married according to the Church, just not per the civil
government. Since the couple can go to the Courthouse later
at their convenience to make it official, how is this a
denial of their rights? The Church would obviously sue and
claim persecution and a denial of First Amendment Rights.
If the Church was to claim that the denial of civil
recognition of temple sealings was a denial of our First
Amendment Rights, would that be hypocritical on the
Church's part to claim that the rights of gays are not being
infringed, even if gay-friendly churches believe in, and
require, a legally recognized marriage in order to
righteously live together? Why is the civil non-recognition
of LDS religiously mandated weddings any different from gay
couples not having their religiously mandated church
weddings not recognized by the state? There is no difference!
We sure complained when our "non-traditional" marriages were
not legally recognized, even after claiming that such a
denial was a denial of our First Amendment Rights, as could
religious gay couples today regarding their own
"non-traditional" marriages.
How is this NOT a double standard on the Church's part if we claim that the civil non-recognition of LDS religiously mandated weddings was a denial of our First Amendment Rights while claiming that the rights of gays are not being infringed when their own religious faith requires a legally recognized marriage in order to righteously live together?
Just something to think about.
