The pulpit and politics in my church – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – rarely come together. Ranking religious institutions and political involvement on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most politically active, my church is likely to be rated a 2 or 3 on the scale.

My church affirms it’s political neutrality. However, it maintains the right to speak out on social and moral issues that affect the Church and families. And occasionally the Church encourages action.

Most recently, our church leaders are encouraging members to vote YES on Proposition 8 in California to provide a legal definition of marriage being between a man and a woman. LDS.org, the Church’s website, offers various links to discussions and information on this issue.

One point made in the discussions is the idea of the “Tyranny of Tolerance” – when tolerance is redefined to mean acceptance rather than love.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Latter-day Saint church leader, clarifies and reminds us what “tolerance” means:

“Tolerance obviously requires a non-contentious manner…

The Ethical Society, and our national federation, the American Ethical Union, has long supported abortion as being an often difficult but spiritual and ethical choice. Our highest value is the worth and dignity of every person, and since pregnant women are clearly people, while pregnancies are not clearly people (witness all the arguments and differences of opinion on when human life begins), our official stance (individual members, of course, have freedom of opinion) is that to force a woman against her will to carry a pregnancy she does not want threatens her physical, psychological, and spiritual health, and therefore it violates rather than affirms her worth and dignity.

The Missouri Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice is an organization that brings together representative voices for the millions of clergy and lay people from every major religion and denomination (and many minor ones) who support women’s and men’s sexual health and reproductive rights. MoRCRC’s…

This title reflects the first of 2 good questions posed by one of the readers (who named his/her Centrist) of my first blog posting about finding my Muslim voice. The part I am going to address in this post is quotes below (emphasis in the quote is mine).

“I saw a woman in a West County grocery store the other day with traditional Muslim dress, not a burka, but the only part showing were her eyes. That is fine, I have no objections with her choice.”

“… Our culture is so different in terms of outward sexuality and homosexuality that is so contradictory to the Muslim faith, that I don’t understand why they would not prefer to live in Saudi Arabia or some other Muslim country where they can live more easily which in the norms of their culture and religion.

I have a problem with Muslims coming here and not wishing to assimilate and try…

Late last week, a federal panel on religious freedom urged President Bush to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics in August.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom said that “unless there is substantial improvement in respecting Tibetans’ religious freedom, including by opening direct and concrete talks with the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan Buddhists’ spiritual leader.”

Religion News Service ran a story about the panel’s statement Monday.

House speaker Nancy Pelosi had previously suggested Bush not attend the opening ceremonies to protest China’s crackdown on Tibet. Earlier today, the White House left an opening for Bush to back out of the ceremonies, but attend some of the events, according to CNN.