One may believe, as do the folks who maintain the lds4gaymarriage site, that expressing oneself to government officials as being for gay marriage is inconsistent with having good standing in the church.
I don't see it that way.
If one believes, as I do (tentatively), that gay marriage will strengthen the family unit as the fundamental unit of society, then one can in clear conscience agree with the church's right to support the amendment while personally opposing it. The church statement says that straight marriage is the only "acceptable" kind, but does not elaborate. If one takes that to mean, "acceptable by God", then one can believe both that straight marriage is the only acceptable kind for bringing about eternal families but that gay marriage can be acceptable secularly in this free, non-theocratic society. The church's official statements "favor" a traditional marriage amendment, but stop short of proscribing such a view as the only acceptable view for members to hold. The church has greatly decreased its propensity to firmly dictate political positions (and parties) for their members since the 1800s. I don't personally know of any church discipline resulting from political views (only from doctrinal views), although it seems I've heard claims of such.
I'm very tentative in my views. I've heard claims of strong data supporting the equivalent (or even superior) child rearing capabilities of gay couples. I've heard claims of strong data denying that very thing. Basically, I respect the rights of people to believe the set of data that resonates with their gut. Which means I tolerate both folks who oppose gay marriage and those who support it. Unfortunately, I realize there are many gays who refuse to acknowledge even the possibility of any non-discriminatory rationale for opposing gay marriage. This is only a testament to their narrow-mindedness and hypocrisy. One view I find logically valid, non-discriminatory, and potentially true was expressed several months ago on NPR. And, of course, there are many religious folks who can't examine the gay marriage debate from any paradigm but their own, which is equally closed-minded.
So, my position is tentative. I remain a student of the issue. But so far:
- I DO believe it is fair to extend marriage or some legislative equivalent to gay couples,
- I do NOT believe it is a matter of civil rights,
- I'm not sure whether recognizing gay marriage will have positive or negative overall social consequences, and
- I DO believe that while the church "favors" societal institutions reflecting God's plan for the family, I can independently study it out and conclude for myself what to support as the best possible governance.