Mormon Inquiry

Mormon Inquiry


Tom Hanks, take two

posted by Dave Banack

Tom Hanks has modified his recent statement that Mormons are un-American for supporting Proposition 8 (see “Big Love producer sounds off on Prop 8“). Through a publicist, Hanks released a statement to People Magazine (is this the magazine of record for Hollywood types?) as follows:

Last week, I labeled members of the Mormon church who supported California’s Proposition 8 as “un-American.” I believe Proposition 8 is counter to the promise of our Constitution; it is codified discrimination. But everyone has a right to vote their conscience – nothing could be more American. To say members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who contributed to Proposition 8 are “un-American” creates more division when the time calls for respectful disagreement. No one should use “un- American” lightly or in haste. I did. I should not have.
Sincerely,
Tom Hanks

Thank you, Tom. FYI, it’s “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” A good publicist ought to catch things like that. Of course, nothing could be more American than bad spelling.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(20)
post a comment
BrentW

posted January 24, 2009 at 8:34 pm


It’s very refreshing to see someone in the public eye actually apologize for a statement that was not well-thought-out. With today’s media, *so many* unfair statements in the media get a free pass. I admire Mr. Hanks for his integrity, although I do respectfully disagree.



report abuse
 

Jacob J

posted January 24, 2009 at 9:12 pm


Thank goodness, I’ll be able to watch Splash again.



report abuse
 

Rob

posted January 25, 2009 at 2:05 am


I think Tom Hanks’ clarification is simply fabulous.



report abuse
 

Proud Daughter of Eve

posted January 25, 2009 at 4:08 pm


I’m ambivalent. I’d be more inclined to believe in his sincerity if the words “I’m sorry” had actually been involved. He neatly retracts his position but he doesn’t apologize. It seems half-hearted at best and cynical at worst.



report abuse
 

NateDredge

posted January 25, 2009 at 7:02 pm


While being against gay marriage is more then likely being on the wrong side of history, being on Tom Hanks bad side is certinaly being on the wrong side of today. Thanks Mr. Hanks, for what is oddly the best bit of news the Church has had yet this year.



report abuse
 

Bill Kilpatrick

posted January 25, 2009 at 10:54 pm


I agree with Tom Hanks’ original statement.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 26, 2009 at 10:04 am


As do I. Voting to take people’s rights away is still definitely UN-American – and UN-Constitutional.



report abuse
 

The Only True and Living Nathan

posted January 26, 2009 at 12:19 pm


So, Your Name, clarify it for me:
Is it the part where the people use the Constitutionally-mandated process to change the Constitution the un-American and un-Constitutional part?
Or would it have been okay if (as in other states) a change to the state Constitution were put to a referendum before a panel of judges ruled on it?
Or are we just using “un-American” and “un-Constitutional” for synonyms of “stuff I don’t like”?



report abuse
 

California Lady

posted January 26, 2009 at 1:19 pm


I’ve never read the CA constitution in full, but I did read the decision of the majority who overturned Prop. 22. Those justices didn’t just create a spin on some legal document; they tried to rewrite nature.
Tom Hank’s statement in the first place was disappointing but not surprising, especially as the producer of the Big Love show. Since celebrities don’t often apologize, that he did is to his credit, but it would have been better if the had kept his feelings to himself in the first place. Not likely these days.



report abuse
 

Rick

posted January 26, 2009 at 1:29 pm


Comment to Bill
I am sure that all the good Latter-Day Saints who have fought and died in the defense of you right to agree with such “Ignorant” comments might differ.



report abuse
 

Proud Daughter of Eve

posted January 26, 2009 at 6:10 pm


That was not an apology; it was just back-peddling. The words “I’m sorry” did not cross the man’s lips. He did not even speak TO the people he had slandered, merely ABOUT them. I’m still disappointed in Mr. Hanks.



report abuse
 

Bill Kilpatrick

posted January 27, 2009 at 6:17 pm


Those offended by Tom Hanks’ earlier remarks – about how un-American Prop 8 is – need to get over themselves. It’s not as if Tom Hanks had pumped resources into a campaign to ban temple marriage or polygamy or otherwise strip Mormons of their rights.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 27, 2009 at 6:21 pm


Comment to Rick:
I am sure all the gays, and opponents of Prop 8, who have made sacrifices for your freedom would disagree with you as well. The moment some group (including right-wing Mormons who think they’re the only real Mormons) thinks it has a monopoly on virtue is the moment it succumbs to its own Nephite disease of pride.



report abuse
 

RickLDS

posted January 27, 2009 at 7:24 pm


The “Mormons” have never tried to redefine marriage. Prop 8 merely supported defining marriage as being between man and woman as it has been for millenia. This does not have anything to do with whether same-sex partners should not be allowed the same civil rights in a union. As it is now, it protects the churches from lawsuits which HAVE been threatened. Militant gays would try to force churches to perform these “weddings” in their churches or temples and claim discrimination if denied. These militant gays don’t appear to be interested in just having the same civil rights or priveledges.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 30, 2009 at 8:51 pm


This whole thing is about lawsuits always has been. Mormons don’t really care what people who aren’t a part of our church do and generally never have. Only when laws and ordinances begin to infringe on the church and open it up to litigation and abuse by the media or by other means do they ask not order their members to follow their conscious and vote accordingly. Doesn’t sound to me like any kind of abuse or organized antagonism against the gays. And as always if you don’t like how the church believes then don’t join. Just don’t try to force the church to change its beliefs to suit you. The last statement I find extremely weird why would anyone want to force a church to change its beliefs to suit them it’s the weirdest concept I have ever herd of. It seems a person in that state of mind is not really interested in following god just in making god follow him it’s a strange concept to me.



report abuse
 

lds-richard

posted January 30, 2009 at 8:52 pm


This whole thing is about lawsuits always has been. Mormons don’t really care what people who aren’t a part of our church do and generally never have. Only when laws and ordinances begin to infringe on the church and open it up to litigation and abuse by the media or by other means do they ask not order their members to follow their conscious and vote accordingly. Doesn’t sound to me like any kind of abuse or organized antagonism against the gays. And as always if you don’t like how the church believes then don’t join. Just don’t try to force the church to change its beliefs to suit you. The last statement I find extremely weird why would anyone want to force a church to change its beliefs to suit them it’s the weirdest concept I have ever herd of. It seems a person in that state of mind is not really interested in following god just in making god follow him it’s a strange concept to me.



report abuse
 

Dean nWhitaker

posted February 3, 2009 at 11:21 pm


Mr. Hanks; Thanks for calling me unAmerican, I am another Californian but I think diffrent than you do. I was a prisoner of war, shot down over Germany. and have received many medals for valor, including the Purple heart for the invasion of France ( which you made a ton of money on at our expence. Recently I received the Freedom medal from France. For your info. There were three Sudnay morning Church services in our Prison camp, Catholic, Protestant and L.D.S. (Mormom) I have grown up in the Mormon hurch and have lived a blessed life being married for 64 years and have had a successful business building homes in Laguna Beach. I have always been proud of my heratige and have have been admired for my actions. Dean Whitaker (see pic on Google–Jon nPorter Conmgresman–Nevada Heros–Dean Whitaker Las Vegaas, Nv. ok2b80@cox.net



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 3, 2009 at 11:31 pm


“One day he may be the first gay evangelical minister.”
Um, he’s about 41 years too late. The openly gay, very evangelicl Rev. Troy Perry founded the Metropolitan community Church in 1968.
Besides, haven’t you heard? Haggard is not gay. He said so himself on Larry King. His ‘doctor’ even said so.
And neither is Larry Craig.
Liars both. But not gay.
The damage of the closet, the damage perpetrated by the lies of ‘The Church’ (TM) is astronomical in the amount of spiritual (and sometimes physical) violence heaped on God’s gay and lesbian children. Haggard’s just getting a taste of what gay citizens have to put up with on a daily basis – and in ‘The Land Of The Free’ (TM) too!



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 3, 2009 at 11:35 pm


Nathan,
“So, Your Name, clarify it for me:”
Be glad to, since it’s so easy…
“Is it the part where the people use the Constitutionally-mandated process to change the Constitution the un-American and un-Constitutional part?”
Actually, the California law requires that changes to the Constitution be made via a 2/3 majority in the Legislature. So not only the intent of the law was UN-Constitutional, the use of a referendum is also UN-Constitutional and just as UN-Amerircn as stripping away rights from a group of people.
BTW, a side note: that same Legislature voted (twice) in favor of same-sex marriages.
“Or would it have been okay if (as in other states) a change to the state Constitution were put to a referendum before a panel of judges ruled on it?”
Putting peoples rights to a referendum is both UN-Constitutional and UN-American no matter what (or how many) other States do.
Odd though, that they had to change their Constitutions in order to make the inherent discrimination ‘Constitutional’. It wasn’t ‘Constitutional’ until they changed them.
“Or are we just using “un-American” and “un-Constitutional” for synonyms of “stuff I don’t like”?”
Would you “like” it if your rights were put to a popular vote? Would you find that ‘American’? Constitutional?
See how easy that was? Thanx 4 askin’.
.
Note to California Lady…
“Those justices didn’t just create a spin on some legal document; they tried to rewrite nature.”
The Justices (the majority of whom were Republican appointees, btw) did exactly their job – namely, interpret law. They found the existing prohibition of same-sex marriage UN-Constitutional. It failed the equal protections clause. Speaking of “things you don’t like”, eh? Oh, and homosexuality is natural; no ‘re-writing’ necessary.
.
Note to RickLDS,
“This does not have anything to do with whether same-sex partners should not be allowed the same civil rights in a union.”
But of course, gay citizens don’t have “the same civil rights” – not even in “civil” unions. Read up about the 1,176 rights, privileges, benefits and obligations they don’t have. There are still some 30 States in which someone can still be fired simply for being gay. Gay citizens can’t even serve their country in the military. You speak of an imaginary America if you think gays have any thing near equal rights.
“As it is now, it protects the churches from lawsuits which HAVE been threatened. Militant gays would try to force churches to perform these “weddings” in their churches or temples and claim discrimination if denied.”
This is pure, unmitigated B.S. (aka a lie, aka the bearing of false witness, aka a sin). Proof? The Holy Roman Catholic Church (TM) refuses to re-marry divorced people, even though it is perfectly legal. Name me one successful lawsuit that has ‘forced’ them to perform such marriages against their tenets. It is lies like this that caused Prop 8 to pass. If you have to resort to lies to ‘win’ the battle, you have already lost the war.
“These militant gays don’t appear to be interested in just having the same civil rights or priveledges.”
We don’t have those yet. More delusion. But what else should we expect of liars?
.
And lastly to ldsRichard,
“And as always if you don’t like how the church believes then don’t join.”
Believe me, I’m not a member. Not sure why I should be forced to abide by the tenets of a Church I don’t belong to though. And in no way does the LDS Church have to change its tenets. I could care less. I just wish they had left this issue alone. What people of other faiths do shouldn’t be any of their friggin’ business.



report abuse
 

Pingback: Big Love hits below the belt - Mormon Inquiry



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Mormon Inquiry. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Most Recent Mormon Story on Beliefnet Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 2:21:45pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

The meanings of Zion
This is the third post on Richard L. Bushman's Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction (OUP, 2008). [See Part 1 and Part 2.] In Chapter Three, Bushman reviews the several meanings of the term "Zion" in LDS doctrine and thinking. The Mormon sense of Zion has no real parallels in Protestant though

posted 11:00:37pm Jul. 29, 2009 | read full post »

A statistical portrait of Mormons
The Pew Forum recently issued a detailed summary of survey information about Mormons gathered as part of a much larger survey of religious life in the United States. It is a very readable summary, noting that Mormons comprise 1.7% of adults in the US; 35% of Mormon adults live in Utah and 13% live i

posted 12:33:08pm Jul. 29, 2009 | read full post »

July 24th: Pioneer Day in Utah
July 24th is a state holiday in Utah, designated Pioneer Day. It commemorates the entry of the first wagon train of Mormons into the Salt Lake Valley in the summer of 1847. They came down Emigration Canyon, somewhat north of the present I-80 corridor which comes down Parley's Canyon. Brigham Young w

posted 5:38:50pm Jul. 23, 2009 | read full post »

Finding heretics in strange places
A very interesting post at Mormon Matters, reviewing a 1989 book titled "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up?" The book was written by an attorney who grew up a Jehovah's Witness, then became an Evangelical Christian. That lasted until he conducted a thorough reading the original writings of the

posted 6:27:09pm Jul. 22, 2009 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.