By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples

Orson Scott Card has a blog entry* on Mormontimes.com that opens with this proclamation:

The first and greatest threat from court decisions in California and Massachusetts, giving legal recognition to "gay marriage," is that it marks the end of democracy in America.

A little hyperbolic, sure, but that's to be expected of a right-wing rant against The Gay Agenda. But Card saves the Big Guns for last. Here are the last two paragraphs, which start with a stirring call to action (in the form of a rhetorical question):

How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.

Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.

It's worth remembering the history of the Mormon church. Hell, the history of Christianity, too, why not. The very same page that had Card's blog had a banner on top featuring a quote from the book of John, chapter 13, verse 35, "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." The verse immediately preceding it in the bible is the famous one about "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another." All this is attributed to Christ even as he contemplates his own death.

Mormons, too, were persecuted for loving too much (among other things). Though instead of staying (as a body of believers), or even walking to their death/redemption, as Christ did, they fled, first from New York to Ohio, then to Missouri, then Illinois, and finally Utah. In this, then, there are echoes of the Exodus story, featuring a group favored by God, but persecuted by the government.

What then, does it mean, that an heir of this religious history finds himself advocating for the destruction of a government that essentially has become too permissive? If indeed he feels persecuted (and I suppose we can grant him that, though it's a stretch to say that Mormons are "persecuted" by a government that recognizes same-sex marriage), should he not surrender to it in humility, secure in his redemption (like Christ), or humbly working to change it through love (like Christ's admonition to his followers), or fleeing to more accommodating vistas (like early Mormons) or even fleeing and waiting for God to show his favor by inflicting plagues and disasters upon the oppressor (like Moses & Co.)?

What precedent calls for the imposition of the will of the people onto unfortunate minorities? Democracy, that legacy from the same-sex-loving Greeks.

Irony also has Greek roots. It comes from eiron, to dissemble. And there is something rather false about this particular Mormon's rabid and violent opposition to same-sex marriage.

*Hat-tip to Joe.My.God. where I found out about this blog post