8: The Mormon Proposition

[BoomerD]

http://mormonsfor8.com/

"A Stipulation [link to PDF version] in the matter of whether the LDS Church reported non-monetary contributions on time during the 2008 election has been completed and will be submitted for final action on June 10th. The Stipulation fines the Church $5,539.00. This is equal to 15% of the amount of money deemed to have been reported late. The 13 separate counts at issue totaled $36,928.00. The stipulation notes the dates and amounts of the late-reported donations.

Where did the money donated to Protect Marriage come from?

California - 75% of the monetary contributions ($27,470,846)

Utah - 7% of the monetary contributions ($2,549,273)

Texas - 3% of the monetary contributions ($1,120,775)

Connecticut - 3% of the monetary contributions ($1,167,450) This includes a $1 million donation from the Catholic Fraternal Organization, the Knights of Columbus.

Everywhere else - 12% of the monetary contributions ($4,220,404)

Total monetary contributions to Protect Marriage come to $40,042,107.98. This does not include about $200,000 in loans and $600,000 in non-monetary donations (including $190,000 from the LDS Church). The Protect Marriage coalition was not the only money-gathering committee in favor of Prop 8, but it was by far the largest. All the other committees combined gathered less than $4 million. According to our research, at least half of the monetary contributions were from individual Mormons."

 

[Homerboy]

http://mormonsfor8.com/

"A Stipulation [link to PDF version] in the matter of whether the LDS Church reported non-monetary contributions on time during the 2008 election has been completed and will be submitted for final action on June 10th. The Stipulation fines the Church $5,539.00. This is equal to 15% of the amount of money deemed to have been reported late. The 13 separate counts at issue totaled $36,928.00. The stipulation notes the dates and amounts of the late-reported donations.

Where did the money donated to Protect Marriage come from?

California - 75% of the monetary contributions ($27,470,846)

Utah - 7% of the monetary contributions ($2,549,273)

Texas - 3% of the monetary contributions ($1,120,775)

Connecticut - 3% of the monetary contributions ($1,167,450) This includes a $1 million donation from the Catholic Fraternal Organization, the Knights of Columbus.

Everywhere else - 12% of the monetary contributions ($4,220,404)

Total monetary contributions to Protect Marriage come to $40,042,107.98. This does not include about $200,000 in loans and $600,000 in non-monetary donations (including $190,000 from the LDS Church). The Protect Marriage coalition was not the only money-gathering committee in favor of Prop 8, but it was by far the largest. All the other committees combined gathered less than $4 million. According to our research, at least half of the monetary contributions were from individual Mormons."

The money shot is always at the end.

That's the point. In OFFICIAL LDS Church documents the formation of a entity to defelct the involvement of the Church is outlined. Members were directed to send money directly to these 3rd parties instead of the Church itself. The Church didn't write a multi-million dollar check, but they instructed their (obiedent) members to donate generously direcly through the established entity.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's because there's nothing to say to your babbling, other than to continue to point out your bigotry, and hatefulness for anyone that doesn't think in a manner that you approve of.

Hey, you were the dim witted fool who asked how Moron money changed people's minds when even a 5 year old can see that with conservatives it's always about getting there bigoted idiot base to the poles by stirring up their bigoted hate. You were a simple minded ass who had his absurd point shot down and now you're all pissed.

Now tell me that the intention of the Moron money was to change people's minds and not to stoke up bigot hate to get them to the polls or shut the fuck up. There is no other point than this.

 

[xj0hnx]

Hey, you were the dim witted fool who asked how Moron money changed people's minds when even a 5 year old can see that with conservatives it's always about getting there bigoted idiot base to the poles by stirring up their bigoted hate. You were a simple minded ass who had his absurd point shot down and now you're all pissed.

Now tell me that the intention of the Moron money was to change people's minds and not to stoke up bigot hate to get them to the polls or shut the fuck up. There is no other point than this.

You are delusional, and a bigot. Mormons spending money isn't going to make people that are pro gay marriage suddenly snap and be against it, and only a real idiot would think so. I know you're all mad because most people don't agree with you, but that doesn't change reality.

 

[OCGuy]

I wonder if the mormons made Obama support DOMA?

 

[CrackRabbit]

And how did Mormons spending money change people from against the proposition to for it? You think they were out paying people to vote for it? If anything they informed, and mobilized people that already supported it to get out and vote.

And you just supported what Woolfe was trying to get at. Money spent mobilizing the base may have tipped the scales on that particular proposition.

 

[OCGuy]

I think this thread needs a very basic lesson:

There was also an increase in southern goose migration right around the same time. Maybe it had something to do with it as well?

 

[woolfe9999]

And how did Mormons spending money change people from against the proposition to for it? You think they were out paying people to vote for it? If anything they informed, and mobilized people that already supported it to get out and vote.

If that's all they were doing, then why were we bombarded with adverstisements telling us that if gays are allowed to marry, our children would be taught to want buttsex in school? If they just wanted to mobilize the people who already supported it, all they had to do was inform people that there was vote.

Sorry, but in the real world, a certain percentage of would be fense sitters ARE persuaded by political advertsiing. If this were not so, billions wouldn't be spent on it every year in this country.

And this particular vote went 52/48 in favor, with most of the pre-election polls being the opposite. In a close vote, you can bet the Mormon money is what made the difference.

- wolf

 

[OCGuy]

^ Oh man you are dense.

 

[xj0hnx]

And you just supported what Woolfe was trying to get at. Money spent mobilizing the base may have tipped the scales on that particular proposition.

No, that's not what he said at all. Them spending money didn't make people for, or against anything, if it did anything it got the people that already supported Prop 8 out to the polls. Of course all this is, is a blame game, and disregards the fact that it might have passed even if they hadn't spent a cent.

Mormons spending money didn't make people that didn't support it stay home from the polls, or stop supporting gay marriage did it?

 

[xj0hnx]

If that's all they were doing, then why were we bombarded with adverstisements telling us that if gays are allowed to marry, our children would be taught to want buttsex in school? If they just wanted to mobilize the people who already supported it, all they had to do was inform people that there was vote.

Sorry, but in the real world, a certain percentage of would be fense sitters ARE persuaded by political advertsiing. If this were not so, billions wouldn't be spent on it every year in this country.

And this particular vote went 52/48 in favor, with most of the pre-election polls being the opposite. In a close vote, you can bet the Mormon money is what made the difference.

- wolf

Than you should be blaming the people that didn't want it that stayed home. Most "fence sitters" aren't the worried about their children getting the buttsecks in school type, that's a cop out to Nth degree.

 

[Homerboy]

If that's all they were doing, then why were we bombarded with adverstisements telling us that if gays are allowed to marry, our children would be taught to want buttsex in school? If they just wanted to mobilize the people who already supported it, all they had to do was inform people that there was vote.

Sorry, but in the real world, a certain percentage of would be fense sitters ARE persuaded by political advertsiing. If this were not so, billions wouldn't be spent on it every year in this country.

And this particular vote went 52/48 in favor, with most of the pre-election polls being the opposite. In a close vote, you can bet the Mormon money is what made the difference.

- wolf

These were all points mentioned in the movie. The types of commericals and the "message" they were sending. In addition the pre and post voting polls.

 

[werepossum]

True dat. I'm a life-long Democrat...but I'm NOT very liberal. I rarely support the "let's raise taxes to study the mating habits of the banana slug" types of initiatives, nor MOST school bonds.

Just being a Dem doesn't make me a "librul."

Dinosaur attitudes like yours are responsible for the woeful state of banana slug porn today, dude.

You really need to quit posting trash unless you have some good evidence to back it up. It has already been pointed out to you in other threads but you ignore what doesn't go along with your paradigm of the world (i.e. Mormons can do no right and walk around giving blanket-parties to gay people using the Book of Mormon no less).

The official paperwork (required by law) sent to the state of California by the LDS church listing their contributions to the main organization behind Prop 8 (protectmarriage.com) stated the following:

Non-monetary contributions = $189,903.58

Monetary contributions = $0.00

Link

$190k =/= $20M

Thank you, I was really wondering why the LDS church would spend $20 million on this issue. I'm still wondering why they would spend $190K, but that's probably a minor amount for the LDS church nationally. Still, it's hard to imagine that many individual Mormons individually donating $20 million unless the church is making an issue over it, but that's just a guess as I have no close contacts in the Mormon church.

And as a happily divorced (also a no-no to the LDS church) and happily remarried man I plan on being silent about the sanctity of marriage, having found a certain flexibility to be personally a nice thing.

 

[woolfe9999]

Than you should be blaming the people that didn't want it that stayed home. Most "fence sitters" aren't the worried about their children getting the buttsecks in school type, that's a cop out to Nth degree.

I disagree with you about what "most fence sitters" think. One very common type of "fence sitter" on the gay rights issue is your typical self-interested voter who is neither strongly left nor strongly right. This person has a mainstream, mild aversion to homosexuality, but probably has the attitude that gays are generally out of sight, out of mind and he or she doesn't care about what rights they have so long as it doesn't affect him or her. You start telling that type of person that negative consequences will ensue to that person if gays are given this right, and they may decide to switch from nominally opposing to nominally supporting the initiatve, or from not caring enough to vote to caring enough to go and vote yes. These messages DO matter or we wouldn't be bombarded with them constantly. And yes, enough people do believe even stupid campaign pitches like your children being taught to want buttsex in school to sway a vote on a narrow margin like this.

You're absolutely wrong, but let's say for the sake of argument that you're right and that the Mormon's funded message wasn't the deciding factor. Is it OK to think poorly of the Mormon church for spending money to tell lies to the public? Personally, I take offense to false information, particularly false information that defames a group of people.

- wolf

 

[xj0hnx]

I disagree with you about what "most fence sitters" think. One very common type of "fence sitter" on the gay rights issue is your typical self-interested voter who is neither strongly left nor strongly right. This person has a mainstream, mild aversion to homosexuality, but probably has the attitude that gays are generally out of sight, out of mind and he or she doesn't care about what rights they have so long as it doesn't affect him or her. You start telling that type of person that negative consequences will ensue to that person if gays are given this right, and they may decide to switch from nominally opposing to nominally supporting the initiatve, or from not caring enough to vote to caring enough to go and vote yes. These messages DO matter or we wouldn't be bombarded with them constantly. And yes, enough people do believe even stupid campaign pitches like your children being taught to want buttsex in school to sway a vote on a narrow margin like this.

You're absolutely wrong, but let's say for the sake of argument that you're right and that the Mormon's funded message wasn't the deciding factor. Is it OK to think poorly of the Mormon church for spending money to tell lies to the public? Personally, I take offense to false information, particularly false information that defames a group of people.

- wolf

>$190,000 worth of non-monetary funds turned otherwise apathetic voters into anti-gay zealots that ran to the polls to make sure that the dirty homos didn't give their children surprise buttsecks in school? Sorry, I am not buying it. I think you should concentrate more on the real reason it passed ...more Californians supported it than not.

 

[woolfe9999]

>$190,000 worth of non-monetary funds turned otherwise apathetic voters into anti-gay zealots that ran to the polls to make sure that the dirty homos didn't give their children surprise buttsecks in school? Sorry, I am not buying it. I think you should concentrate more on the real reason it passed ...more Californians supported it than not.

Slightly more Californians supported it than not, but only after the well funded Mormon campaign was launched. That is what the polling data proves.

- wolf

 

[OCGuy]

Slightly more Californians supported it than not, but only after the well funded Mormon campaign was launched. That is what the polling data proves.

- wolf

No, because polls have a margin of error.

You are either extremely dense or just trolling at this point.

The polls showed Kerry with a victory.

Right around noon that day, I took a massive dump.

Bush ended up winning.

So my dump is what caused Bush to win! The polls prove it!

 

[xj0hnx]

Slightly more Californians supported it than not, but only after the well funded Mormon campaign was launched. That is what the polling data proves.

- wolf

BWAHAHA that doesn't "prove" anything, other than more Californians voted for it than against it. You act is if there was a 24/7 assault, but what kind of advertising campaign can you do with >$190,000?

 

[OCGuy]

I live in CA and saw exactly 1 commerical.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

You are delusional, and a bigot. Mormons spending money isn't going to make people that are pro gay marriage suddenly snap and be against it, and only a real idiot would think so. I know you're all mad because most people don't agree with you, but that doesn't change reality.

That is why commercials and advertising doesn't work, people don't buy it...

You should probably present that idea to the Coca Cola Company, you'd save them so much money on that input they'd make you the VP in a heartbeat!

In other news, stupid people remain stupid.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I live in CA and saw exactly 1 commerical.

Where do you live? You seem like a reasonable guy without any large amounts of stupid in you so perhaps the area where you live in isn't one where it would make much sense to post billboards or hand out fliers in.

 

[xj0hnx]

That is why commercials and advertising doesn't work, people don't buy it...

You should probably present that idea to the Coca Cola Company, you'd save them so much money on that input they'd make you the VP in a heartbeat!

In other news, stupid people remain stupid.

They weren't selling shampoo, or a particular brand of nacho chips, voting to keep gays from marrying is a bit more personal than Coke, or Pepsi.

 

[werepossum]

I live in CA and saw exactly 1 commerical.

They were special Mormon commercials that only the gullible can see! (Sorry Mormons, you know I love you but I couldn't resist.)

Actually in California, $190,000 might only buy one commercial. I'm guessing there were probably lots of adverts in radio though, not so much to change minds as to get out the vote.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

They weren't selling shampoo, or a particular brand of nacho chips, voting to keep gays from marrying is a bit more personal than Coke, or Pepsi.

Ahhhh, so you mean that all those money spent on campaigns are wasted, no one will ever change their mind on any issue?

Why don't you just shut the fuck up before you make an even bigger fool out of yourself.

People are impressionable, on ALL things, otherwise political advertising would be wasted money and so would "buying an experience with coca cola by drinking coca cola" be.

In essence, most people are fucking stupid.

 

[Elfear]

The money shot is always at the end.

That's the point. In OFFICIAL LDS Church documents the formation of a entity to defelct the involvement of the Church is outlined. Members were directed to send money directly to these 3rd parties instead of the Church itself. The Church didn't write a multi-million dollar check, but they instructed their (obiedent) members to donate generously direcly through the established entity.

Where did you get this information? Maybe you should ask the guys you play basketball with whether they were told/directed/instructed to donate to established entities by the LDS church. In my experience, the LDS church does not tell it's members to donate to any specific entity. I heard messages about protecting the sanctity of marriage, but nothing like "Go donate to Protectmarriage.com".