Mormon Church Fined In Connection With Anti-Gay Marriage Campaign

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: Social Issues ,; State Politics

The Mormon Temple is a truly awe-inspiring piece of architecture. Home to the Mormon Tabernacle choir, this marvel in Salt Lake City, Utah, draws millions of visitors each year.

The Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City, Utah.

(Credit: CBS)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been ordered to pay a small fine for failing to properly report about $37,000 in contributions on behalf the successful effort to pass Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriages in California.

According to the Deseret News, the Church has agreed to pay a $5,539 fine to California's Fair Political Practices Commission for late reporting of contributions (including staff time) to help the "Yes on 8" committee, pending final approval from commissioners.

A church spokesman told the newspaper that while "all institutional contributions made by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to the ProtectMarriage Coalition were reported to the appropriate authorities in California," the church overlooked daily reporting requirements in the last two weeks before the vote and did not report contributions during that period until later.

The Los Angeles Times reports that the fine comes after a complaint from gay-rights activist Fred Karger, who argued the Mormon Church did not adequately disclose its efforts to ban same-sex marriage.

While the Fair Political Practices Commission could have assessed a $5,000 fine for each violation, it reportedly opted for a streamlined process that resulted in a deal with the church for the $5,539 fine.

In a statement, the gay rights group the Human Rights Campaign said the fine reflects "a pattern of blatant disregard for California election laws and provides ongoing evidence that the Mormon Church was a significant leader in the campaign to repeal marriage equality, even while it evaded standard reporting requirements and denied its involvement."

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

33 Comments +

Add a Comment

See all 33 Comments


by JackKingsley December 30, 2010 3:56 PM EST: @Alexis of Avalon.
Truer words have been yet to be spoken. Thank goodness someone has the common sense needed on here. I work at an <a href=http://www.AspenSeniorCenter.org>adult day care center</a> and I've found far more intelligent people there than at any other place or job I've worked at.; Reply to this comment


by nevertellanyone July 19, 2010 1:52 AM EDT: This woman says she has raised 2 deviant perverted homosexual children. One female and one male. (of course she describes them
a little differently).
This woman and a film maker made a movie blasting the Mormon church (church of the latter day saints), because they took a stand
against the proposed forced compliance, of all religious groups to have to marry these deviant perverts. The mormon church was
successful in helping get the message out to the voters of California, and the law, propsition 8 was passed. This law stopped the re-defining
of marriage to include 2 males or 2 females, and it also protects religious groups from being forced by the government to tell them
what they could and couldn't do in their churches.
I think it is interesting to see how viciously these people are now attacking religious churches, for simply wanting to be able to keep
preaching what the bible actually says.
We know these types of attacks are going to get much worse. I wonder how long it will be before the laws will be like they are in Canada,
regarding the forced acceptance of these deviant behaviors in our churches? Right now in Canada, any negative statements about these
behaviors, including simply reading bible scriptures in church, where God says you shall not allow homosexual behavior, is against the
law, and called "hate speech".
Getting back to the woman in the article, I think she has a little bit more to be concerned with than lashing out at the Mormon church.
I think she should focus on exactly what went wrong with her parenting. Even in this messed up world, the statistics of raising 2 deviant
perverted children in the same family, are astronomical. But, then again, seeing how rebellious she is to her own parent's religious beliefs, it is not hard to see where her own children got the idea to rebel from.; Reply to this comment


by charanor June 16, 2010 10:51 PM EDT: In response to "4TheWordofGod" if Christ were alive today, based upon his history- ministering to lepers, advocating for the poor, marginalized, dis-infranchised, and protecting them from money lenders and predators, it likely would be the LGBT community he would be helping, without judgment or prosletizing.

4TheWordofGod talking about (Heaven) and Hell assumes that Hell actually does indeed exist. The concept of Hell was invented by Christians during the latter days of the Roman empire after the emperor Constantine took over as a way to subdue, subjugate and control pagan tribes and the greater Roman empire. The same holds true for the concept of Satan. Many of these tribes lived in heavily forested areas of Europe and worshiped a forest god as a supreme being, usually in the image of the most prevalent animal in the forest- a female deer or antelope. The female also being a very strong icon among these same tribes. Constantine's "Christian army" in order to convert and control these tribal pagan civilizations prosletized that that the god they prayed to, triangular shaped head with antelers was in reality- evil- Satan, which eventually became the image we know today, triangular shaped head with mustache, goatee and piercing eyes (an easy image to fear, mistrust and dislike) with essentially elongated peg like horns at about the area of the temples where the antelers of a deer or antelope are located. And in the color red and associated with extreme heat and paain, below ground- down, below is usually associated with negative vs up, above associated with positive (Heaven)

It was Constantine that introduced much of the imagery we see today- the crucifix, and the cross mainly through merging the concepts of Christ and war- holy war, holy warriors, crusades, etc.

As Christianity grew and spread more through brute force and fear than anything, it was an effective tool to control (at the time considered) a large population over a vast area that was mostly illiterate and very superstitious. Remember, the concept of polylithic societies (Rome, Greece, Macedonia, Troy, Egypt- the known word at the time) to explain weather, natural phenomena and circumstance was almost universal until as recently a couple hundred years earlier (Approx 50-200AD)

Every major event in the middle ages and through most of the second millennium, everything in life was tied to religion- Christianity was done by fear, intimidation, and again brute force, also scams and conning. This attitude still very much holds true today.; Reply to this comment

by Jimcracky June 11, 2010 5:51 PM EDT

And just why hasn't the Latter Day Saints been threatened with removal of their tax exempt status for meddling in an election. Such threats were leveled at liberal churches in California for suggesting from the pulpit that Jesus might have a problem with the war in Iraq. Apparently, if you're conservative homophobic, you can meddle in politics as much as you like. Despicable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this comment


by Justiz56 September 9, 2010 2:46 AM EDT: Even religions are entitled to freedom of speech. This was a moral issue. It effects society. Anyone, including yourself, should be able to express an opinion no matter how perverse or pious it may be. Why do you not critize the black community, 70% of whom supported the proposition? Do you think they did not talk about these issues at church. The gay community should not be allowed to redefine the term "marriage". This is clearly a state issue. That is why you can't marry your sister or your brother. The states get to determine the age, and the nature of marriage. I am grateful for those who boldly stand up for traditional values even when their buisnesses were threatened. Maybe that same threat of boycotting businesses should be made against the businesses who support gay marriage. (I don't believe that but it reflects the fact that it is a two way street). This is a moral issue. Our criiminal codes are full of Morality. The morality of those who enact the law. While I do not doubt that people are born with these inclinations that does not mean the act of intercourse between the parties should be condoned or sanctioned as a marriage. Call it anything else you like but I am against them hijacking the term "marriage" in hopes that the majority of the population will see it as the equivilent of traditional marriage. I know it will ultimately pass, but even if 90% of society felt it was okay, I would call it a sick society just as I would Hitler's Germany. Our consitution does not allow for thought control but does allow control of conduct. Child Molesters (not the same but a good comparison) we are told cannot be cured in most instances. (I also understand the consenting adult argument) Nonetheless, the fact that they are born with the inclination towards children does not make it legal. They may cry we were born this way, we can't help it, your discriminating against us. Still we legally prohibit the conduct. Some states require people carrying the aids virus to inform those with whom they are having sex or they can be criminally prosecuted. Again an example of prohibiting or regulating conduct. The whole point is people have the right to choose and Californians have now chosen twice. Mormons make up 2% of the population, half of which are inactive. I think its time to find another place to lay blame.

by black_howler June 11, 2010 9:12 AM EDT

This was taken from another poster that shows why we need to legalize gay marriage. If you don't feel for this person after reading it, you simply aren't human.

"I am not sure what our President thinks of this dicission but coming from a poor family and knowing what discrimination is all about I would assume he would not care if "Gays" have equal rights. The whole reason why they are asking for rights to be considered married is from the same reason why I would be for it. My own life partner commited suicide in our home with a gun to his heart. After a 28 year union I was deprived to even go his funeral. We had two plots next to each other. But because we did not have a marriage cirtificate "(Legal Document)" of our union his mother had him cremated and his ashes taken back to Missouri where we came from. That is only one example how painful it is. His suicide tramatized me so much and her disregard for my feelings only added to my heartach. That happened on March 21 of 2007 and I still cannot type this without crying for the trauma I have to endure each day. Oh did I mention I am in an electric wheelchair for life? Yes I am and it is very diffacult to find another mate when you are 58 and in a wheelchair. "

Reply to this comment


by black_howler June 11, 2010 9:13 AM EDT: As an example, let me show you how Leviticus is taken out of context by anti-gays, and that these 2 lines, do not condemn homosexuals when you examine Leviticus as a whole.

Leviticus 18:22:
"You shall not lie with a male as those who lie with a female; it is an abomination."

Leviticus 20:13:
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death."

Both of these verses refer to heterosexuals who participated in fertility rituals in order to guarantee good crops and healthy flocks, not homosexuals, there is absolutely no mention of sexual orientation or homosexuality. Also, the word abomination was used for anything that was considered to be religiously unclean or dealing with any type idol worship.

The Hebrew word "toevah" was used in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. "Toevah" has been translated in our Bibles as "abomination" or "detestable". The "toevah" was used throughout the Old Testament for activity involving ethnic contamination and religious idolatry. "Toevah" refers to things that were ritually unclean - like eating pork.

It is significant that another Hebrew word, "zimah," also translated "abomination," which means intrinsic evil or evil by its very nature, was not used in Leviticus 18:22, or Leviticus 20:13.

It is also significant that female homosexual relationships are not mentioned in the old testament. That's because they aren't talking about sexual orientation, they are talking about idolatrous practices.


by black_howler June 11, 2010 3:06 PM EDT: Lol woah woah. I found that post very entertaining but it made my head explode =P

Here's some other info you can use when people quote Leviticus.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than murder. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

This is an old list, but still entertaining nonetheless!


by black_howler June 11, 2010 9:11 AM EDT: The National Library of Medicine pubs confirm that sexual orientation is natural, biologically induced in the first trimester of pregnancy, morally neutral, immutable, neither contagious nor learned, bearing no relation to an individuals ability to form deep and lasting relationships, to parent children, to work or to contribute to society.

From the American Psychological Association: homosexuality is normal; homosexual relationships are normal.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Asociation and American Psychiatric Asociation have endorsed civil marriage for same-sex couples because marriage strengthens mental and physical health and longevity of couples, and provides greater legal and financial security for children, parents and seniors.

America's premier child/mental health associations endorse marriage equality.; Reply to this comment


by black_howler June 11, 2010 9:11 AM EDT: For those of you claiming homosexuality is a "lifestyle", that is a false and ignorant statement. Homosexuality is not a choice. Just like you don't choose the color of your skin, you cannot choose whom you are sexually attracted to. If you can, sorry, but you are not heterosexual, you are bi-sexual. Virtually all major psychological and medical experts agree that sexual orientation is NOT a choice. Most gay people will tell you its not a choice. Common sense will tell you its not a choice. While science is relatively new to studying homosexuality, studies tend to indicate that its biological.

http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
Gay, Straight Men's Brain Responses Differ
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html
http://www.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/06/16/172/

There is overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality is not a choice. Sexual orientation is generally a biological trait that is determined pre-natally, although there is no one certain thing that explains all of the cases. "Nurture" may have some effect, but for the most part it is biological.

And it should also be noted that:
"It is worth noting that many medical and scientific organizations do believe it is impossible to change a person's sexual orientation and this is displayed in a statement by American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers, and National Education Association."; Reply to this comment

by black_howler June 11, 2010 9:11 AM EDT

To those of you using the Bible as a weapon against homosexuality, you are wrong. Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution, pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting adults.

http://www.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
http://www.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
http://www.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
http://www.gaychristian101.com/

Thats why Jesus never mentions it as well. There is nothing immoral, wrong, or sinful about being gay. Jesus, however, clearly states he HATES hypocrites. If you preach goodness, then promote hate and twist the words of the Bible, you are a hypocrite, and will be judged and sent to hell. Homosexuals will not go to hell, hypocrites will.

This is very similar to the religious bigots of the past, where they took Bible passages to condone slavery, keep women down, and used Bible passages to claim blacks as curses who should be enslaved by the white man. People used God to claim that blacks marrying whites was unnatural, and not of God's will.

Reply to this comment


by Justiz56 September 9, 2010 2:53 AM EDT: Purhaps you could so me an example of a homosexual relationship sanctioned by God in any of the scriptures. I don't condone discrimination against anyone, or doing harm to anyone. I simply state that marriage has been defined for centuries and you should not be able to redifine it. I think you should have the rights the married couples have when it comes to insurance and all the other wonderful benefits that married peole have. But I am opposed to calling it marriage. It is not. Read Websters dictionary. Granted my are a little outdated. To claim that we who believe in traditional marriage are "haters" is ridiculous.


by Rawkcuf January 7, 2011 11:03 AM EST: 1 Samuel 18

"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David..."

1 Samuel 20

Jonathan arranges a tryst with David who is in hiding, in fear for his life, "and as touching the mater which thou and I have spoken of, behold, the Lord be between thee and me for ever." Jonathan signaled the OK, and dismissed his servant, and, "David arose out of a place toward tthe south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed on another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded."

2 Samuel 1 After Jonathan dies, David mourns; "very pleasant hast thou been unto me. Thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women."

David was blessed to become the king, and promised that through his line Jesus would be born.

This comment was posted in response to Justiz56 below, but for some reason doesn't have a reply button.

Justiz wrote: "Purhaps (sic) you could so (sic) me an example of a homosexual relationship sanctioned by God in any of the scriptures."

So I did.


by amaciej June 10, 2010 12:42 PM EDT: My church allows gay couples the exact same treatment with regard to marriage as straight couples. I understand and fully support other church's sacred right to not do the same. It's called freedom of religion and it's baked into what America stands for.

What I don't understand is why civil authorities are treating gay couples differently than straight couples. That's not only unfair, isn't it unconstitutional?

Freedom of religion means you can practice it your own way in your own life. It does not mean you are "free" to force others who don't share your beliefs to nonetheless live by them.

Then when supporters of Prop 8 have the gall to cite religious reasons, I mean, how can religious reasons ever be cited as justification for unfair civil laws???

Gay couples function in society just like any other couple. They pay their taxes and mow their lawns like the rest of us. I am fed up with seeing them treated differently. I'm ashamed that we still do this. What country are we living in anyway, Iran? More straight people need to stand up against this. Whites stood up for black civil rights, so why can't straight people stand up for gay civil rights?; Reply to this comment

by stepheneg June 10, 2010 12:04 PM EDT

JESUS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MARRIAGE FOR ALL. This is about civil marriage. What religions have to say is of no consequence. This has nothing to do with them, but everything thing to do with fairness.
Religion is basically bad and brings on troubles.

Steve - Salt Lake City

Reply to this comment


by 4TheWordofGod June 10, 2010 6:45 PM EDT: Respectfully: Your conclusion is not rooted in truth! You, like many, blindly judge all things through the knowlege of men, not by the revelation of God to men. Is it your intent to wait until you pass through the veil of death to learn this? Do you not understand that all those who reject the Son of God will be cast into hell for all eternity!

Hell is a place of hopelessness, of many sorrows, of pain and suffering, with weeping and wailing which shall never ever cease! Please do not choose death! Seek Him who can deliver you from the pains and sorrows of hell.


by AlexisofAvalon June 10, 2010 7:41 PM EDT: This is more a comment to Mr.Christian (whatever your real name is idk). First: Not everyone is Christian, or wants to be Christian. And looking at what is spoken of in what is considered the Christian bible, I don't blame them. Second: The bible itself is hardly the inerrant word of God. It is full of mistranslations, edits, and in some cases, outright mistruths. Third: Even Christ himself said to not trust the words written down by man. Above all else, he commanded that two commandments should be followed: That you believe in God (or a form thereof), and that you treat others how you wish to be treated.

Before you go claiming that someone's conclusion is not "rooted in truth", I highly suggest reading and really examining your own religious beliefs and where they stem from.

@Steve: Religions in and of themselves are not bad. It is the people who twist and corrupt them to suit their own means that are the problem. What most people see as the three major religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Muslim) nowadays is nothing more than a dry husk of what it used to be, corrupted by long lines of men who wished power and station in this life.