Mormon whines about having the civil rights to act as a voting bloc and suffering political fallout from their behavior

There, I fixed the article title for them.

Maybe we’re looking at an altogether different problem than what’s being presented in this article and no amount of playing to bogus emotional appeals is going to slide these eyes away from recognizing it. Feast eyes on this AP article about the backlash against Mormons over the passage of California Prop 8, which banned gay marriage in the state: “Mormon leader: religious freedom at risk.”

“The anti-Mormon backlash after California voters overturned gay marriage last fall is similar to the intimidation of Southern blacks during the civil rights movement, a high-ranking Mormon says in a speech to be delivered Tuesday.” Really? Mormons are actually a group of people unaccepted by society due to their reduced social class and abused by the scions of those who benefited from the division of power and labor. Mormons, after demonstrably perpetrating civil rights abuses are in fact those abused of their civil rights. Sure they are.

When, exactly, during the civil rights movement did blacks (as some sort of organized group, I mean, religion) get together to block the civil rights of another social class? They didn’t? Silly me.

The backlash that Mormons are looking at right now isn’t about religion—certainly religion plays a part—it’s about politics. Politics such as political groupings and identity. The Mormon Church, that entity which is the Mormons gathering together in an organized fashion, decided to take a political position on a matter of civil rights. By doing so they placed themselves as an enemy of everyone who would work towards enlightening society to those civil rights and now are in the crosshairs of angry people. They could have been the Snuffupagus Society and the exact same thing would happen.

In an interview Monday before the speech, Oaks said he did not consider it provocative to compare the treatment of Mormons in the election's aftermath to that of blacks in the civil rights era, and said he stands by the analogy.

"It may be offensive to some — maybe because it hadn't occurred to them that they were putting themselves in the same category as people we deplore from that bygone era," he said.

Mormons vs. gay rights isn’t “Mormons as black people” vs. “gay rights activists as Southern segregationists.” It’s the exact reverse. And yes, I suspect people will find this analogy offensive—Oaks may have just managed to piss off not just gay rights activists but anyone who saw the plight of people with a different skin color as a necessity for civil rights activism. Insulting? No kidding.